Computer upgrade —some thoughts (only if you have time, though)

[NewbieOneKenobi]

Please ignore this if you're busy at work or have something better to do with your free time. This would be way overthinking it for practical purposes, but I'm also quite curious about all this.

This would be for work and games.

Work = translation, which means heavy-duty editing of sometimes complicated .docx files, some of them huge, sometimes with multiple XML errors or bad macros etc. or something else wrong with them (e.g., which causes extreme lag. Translation memories are constantly read and written XML-based files that can be pretty large, but they aren't normally a burden, though their operation may be noticeably delayed in some cases. Normally any old computer should be enough for this, but there have been several situations reducing my existing system to a crawl.

Games = RPG & adventure, RTS & other strategies (grand strategy, Total War, Civ etc.), car racers.

My current config could be summarized as end-of-line Core2Duo: e8600 @ 4 GHz (OC, low temps) on Asus P5Q-E (reasonably high-end P45 board with 6-phase), 8 GB DDR 2@ 800 MHz (non-QVL, quirky and/or less compatible), no SSD (7200 rpm SATA HDD), modern GPU (280X). OEM Windows 7 tied to the mobo. Prefer no Windows 10, but 8.1 would be OK. The PSU could possibly handle another 280X with the right CPU, though I'm not holding my breath.

I have three basic options for upgrading:

1. 775 reprieve: Xeon + SSD

• This would have the core advantage of not requiring $160 for new Windows. No new CPU cooler or anything else, either. The system should perform on level with G3258 or i3-2100 or FX-6300 in multi-core, though slower in single-core applications, which, paradoxically, will include a lot of old games. The system could therefore end up being worse in old games but better in new games than a much newer machine.
• The disadvantage of potentially remaining stuck for longer with what I have now, the worst of it being the RAM.
• Getting a SATA SSD now would seem pointless from the perspective of moving on to a platform that supports M.2. However, after retiring as sys/app drive in this system, a SATA SSD could serve as a decent if slightly overpaid storage option for a non-HDD system with M.2. Not having an HDD would be so good for silence and no vibration.
• As for the Xeon, whatever it costs — $22 for X5450, $35 for 5460, $66 for X5470 (after conversion from local currency) — it will probably be resellable for the same price for some months ahead, perhaps especially the 5470, as it comes already modded for 775 (as opposed to modding your 775 socket for 771).
• All in all, this route is actually much safer and less wasteful than I first thought, and going with any decent 256GB drive that happens to be on sale would make it cheaper than going for a hand-picked 500GB. If going for #2 later, even 256 GB SSD would allow my main SSD (m.2 2280 or whatever's fastest then) to be also 256 GB or even 128. For #3 or #4 I'd need the SSD the same as here.

2. Full box or almost, and OC ready. (Not immediately available — need to wait for pay day, also conflicting with other urgent expenses, which is more a problem.)

• Full solid 1150 base: Z170 with fast DDR4 support, M.2, USB 3.1, 10-phase cooled power section and all that jazz. Perhaps a little over the top but meant to be my last 1150 mobo as well as my first. Investing ahead in not needing to replace the mobo or buy additional controllers later on is a good thing.
• Single 16 GB chip of DDR4, fast and with good support, preferably meant to last as long as the mobo and beyond, with a twin added at some point. Alternatively, matched pair of 8s.
• M.2 2280 for sys/app drive, or whatever's fastest if this is delayed.
• CPU according to whatever's the best deal after purchasing the mobo, which is hard to predict. A good deal on a stronger CPU will be worth delaying some other expenses.
• Tempted to start low at $60 with Pentium G, because it just might turn out sufficient for my needs, given the high single-core performance, good clock, and the fact I can live with 2 cores (though 4 would be preferable). There certainly are better things to buy than excessing power in an underutilized CPU that keeps losing value over time.
• Pentium G opens 3 alternative paths, which means more flexibility to jump at good deals as they pop up: (i) cooler => OC => unlocked CPU; (ii) unlocked CPU => OC => cooler => more OC; (iii) locked CPU.
• The mixed blessing of Pentium: vastly better single core but even more vastly worse multicore than the 775->771 Xeons, therefore curiously liable to be better at old games but worse at new games than the older Xeon CPUs. Possibly less of a problem if I keep my old (current) computer operational.

3. Minimum Skylake = NIB Pentium + cheap mobo + DDR4 RAM. (For immediate purchase.)

• 16 GB single stick, same as #2. But: two banks on the board will suffice, given 32 GB max. And still manage to skip DDR3.
• If cheap mobo (small size, low chipset), then no unlocked CPUs and not much OC before replacing the mobo. On the other hand, that still leaves a lot of room for upgrade.
• No SSD initially if I go for this today, much harder to swallow. No easy access to M.2 later, even harder to take.
• This is better than most deals involving used parts for older sockets — especially if you consider age as a factor (this would be NIP or several months old), support for newer tech, better upgradeability etc.

4. 1150/1155 bargain hunting. (More protracted for obvious reasons, and more unpredictable.)

• Keeping tabs on auctions. Selection based on a subjective blend of available budget, best bang for the buck, and age-related factors.
• This requires vastly superior power-for-dollar to beat the advantages of just getting entry-level NIB Skylake.
• All generations before 6 using DDR3 and Win 8.1 licence no longer sticking to the mobo makes socket changes easier, and there will be plenty of nice CPUs to buy for 1155 and 1150 for years ahead. DDR3 will probably still be resellable comfortably in the event of going for something that requires DDR4.
• No M.2 in foreseeable future, a pity. As per #3.

[li]Part of me is really tempted to avoid all this gambling and time wasting. Part of me, however, enjoys it. Still, I must admit Skylake almost always wins on the balance of pros and cons vs higher-end but older chips, and when it doesn't, then it's usually a close call anyway.[/li][/list]

Thoughts?

[tp4tissue]

1. 775 reprieve: Xeon + SSD


2. Full box or almost, and OC ready. (Not immediately available — need to wait for pay day, also conflicting with other urgent expenses, which is more a problem.)


3. Minimum Skylake = NIB Pentium + cheap mobo + DDR4 RAM. (For immediate purchase.)


4. 1150/1155 bargain hunting. (More protracted for obvious reasons, and more unpredictable.)


Thoughts?

1. Never buy into obsolete platforms

2. Best option, best price/ performance ratio/ compatibility with new applications

-6700k
-z170
-DDR4 4000
-AMD RX 480
-Intel CPU delid tool
---Liquid Ultra (necessary for delid cpus)



3. NEVER DO THIS, cheap out on parts, you'll just have to buy everything over again..

4. Obsolete platform.



With regards to SSD,  DO NOT buy pcie-ssd,  they're not worth the asking price because they're not faster AT ALL for desktop usage..

All of those benchmarks are unrealistic..   SSD is the worst place to buy premium.. 

Get a budget 512GB Sata 6 ssd, and wait for intel Crosspoint.

[suicidal_orange]

Keeping it very vague as I'm out of touch with hardware at the moment, but when it comes to RAM I don't see the sense in buying one big stick - 2x8gb is cheaper and quicker than a 16gb and it doesn't sound like you'll need more for a while.

This time waster would be more fun with a comfortable immediate spend budget )

[tp4tissue]

Keeping it very vague as I'm out of touch with hardware at the moment, but when it comes to RAM I don't see the sense in buying one big stick - 2x8gb is cheaper and quicker than a 16gb and it doesn't sound like you'll need more for a while.

This time waster would be more fun with a comfortable immediate spend budget )

depends on your use cases..

I've gotten used to ramdisk on my server.. it's pretty darn fast.. I got 128gb of ram on the thing, so I got 40gb of ram disk partitioned..


But given the price of DDR4, It's conceivable that a person might even use an 8gb ram disk partition for specific applications..

[NewbieOneKenobi]

Keeping it very vague as I'm out of touch with hardware at the moment, but when it comes to RAM I don't see the sense in buying one big stick - 2x8gb is cheaper and quicker than a 16gb and it doesn't sound like you'll need more for a while.

I might go 8x2 if I get a four-bank mobo. But with a two-bank one I'll probably go 16x2 (if it doesn't already come with 2x8).

This time waster would be more fun with a comfortable immediate spend budget )

Oh yeah. Some really serious performers could be had judging by what I've seen on auctions involving older i7's and the highest of gen 3 or 4 i5's.

[Moistgun]

1. 775 reprieve: Xeon + SSD


2. Full box or almost, and OC ready. (Not immediately available — need to wait for pay day, also conflicting with other urgent expenses, which is more a problem.)


3. Minimum Skylake = NIB Pentium + cheap mobo + DDR4 RAM. (For immediate purchase.)


4. 1150/1155 bargain hunting. (More protracted for obvious reasons, and more unpredictable.)


Thoughts?

1. Never buy into obsolete platforms

2. Best option, best price/ performance ratio/ compatibility with new applications

-6700k
-z170
-DDR4 4000
-AMD RX 480
-Intel CPU delid tool
---Liquid Ultra (necessary for delid cpus)



3. NEVER DO THIS, cheap out on parts, you'll just have to buy everything over again..

4. Obsolete platform.



With regards to SSD,  DO NOT buy pcie-ssd,  they're not worth the asking price because they're not faster AT ALL for desktop usage..

All of those benchmarks are unrealistic..   SSD is the worst place to buy premium.. 

Get a budget 512GB Sata 6 ssd, and wait for intel Crosspoint.

How certain are we that the 480x will be as insane of a price/performance buy, and not just hype?

If it is indeed what it seems like it is going to be, OP should sell the 280x NOW to get the most he will ever get for it from someone looking to crossfire.  Then he can buy the 480x using 3/4 of the profit from the sold 280x. 

Also the 280x should use quite a bit more power than the 480x, removing OPs concern with a better PSU if he gets a 480x.

Also OP, get ssd pls.

[NewbieOneKenobi]

Thanks, Tissue, you'll always there when I need some advice.

1. Never buy into obsolete platforms

It kinda always comes out a losing deal, doesn't it?

2. Best option, best price/ performance ratio/ compatibility with new applications

Probably.

This made me think of something, though — I don't really use any new applications that would require compatibility. This may change as games come out, but probably nothing else. MS Office, LibreOffice, Trados, basic viewers/readers like Acrobat Reader & IrfanView, web browsers, and that's it, apart from games.

3. NEVER DO THIS, cheap out on parts, you'll just have to buy everything over again..

I'd normally not skimp on the mobo with a NIB rig. What makes me think of making an exception this time is special deals and my unique financial situation — theoretically capable but with a lot on my plate, finishing my Ph.D., paying off some debts, helping out some family members who've got themselves in trouble and so on. I can justify a PC budget as a work tool, but this isn't the right time for too extravagant expenses.

On the other hand, there are already some deals on used 1151 stuff, such as i5-6500 + Gigabyte GA-H110M-S2 today selling for far less than the cost of an i5-6400, which I missed today. Obviously, I'd be replacing the mobo eventually, but for the time being I'd only have needed to throw in a RAM stick and a Win 8.1 to complete the platform change. A NIB i5-6500 + Z170 would have cost twice the money. Hard to beat.

4. Obsolete platform.

Leaning that way too. As in, sure, there's looking forward to good prices for all those i7's and top-end i5's, but the price difference to comparably performing NIB Skylakes normally isn't huge now.

With regards to SSD,  DO NOT buy pcie-ssd,  they're not worth the asking price because they're not faster AT ALL for desktop usage..

All of those benchmarks are unrealistic..   SSD is the worst place to buy premium..

Just to be sure, does that mean you'd say this (M.2 2280 R 2150 W 1260) isn't worth the price of a Samsung EVO 512 GB for office use and gaming?

Get a budget 512GB Sata 6 ssd, and wait for intel Crosspoint.

I guess that means I can get the SSD right away, before making any decisions about the rest.

How certain are we that the 480x will be as insane of a price/performance buy, and not just hype?

If it is indeed what it seems like it is going to be, OP should sell the 280x NOW to get the most he will ever get for it from someone looking to crossfire.  Then he can buy the 480x using 3/4 of the profit from the sold 280x. 

Also the 280x should use quite a bit more power than the 480x, removing OPs concern with a better PSU if he gets a 480x.

The 280x was a bargain buy, at $133 shipped, in local currency, in a country with 23% VAT, customs/import fees etc., which makes tech more expensive than the prices in the US, for example. At that time that was the cost of a NIB 750ti or an old 7870 or 760 maybe. It was a 50-60% premium on top of a 7850. Wasn't sure about a 570 or 580, which would have cost half the price. I was on a 4850 at the time, with my 460 (GTX, of course) having died last summer and my previous purchase of a 280X ending badly. Perhaps it was a mistake to get it instead of saving up toward a platform upgrade, an emotional decision largely, partly to stop wasting any more more time the choice among lower and older cards, where the $50 or something difference was a fine price for both the advantages of the 280X over the alternatives and my peace of mind. I certainly wouldn't mind that 480 upgrade at +1/4 of the money, but I certainly am not looking forward to reverting to 4850. But I'll keep an eye on the prices. If the 480 uses even just a bit less power than the 280X, then I should be perfectly safe for CF eventually, without needing to replace the PSU.

Also OP, get ssd pls.

Are you also in favour of just getting a SATA SSD now and not thinking much about M.2 2280?

[TacticalCoder]

I'm probably a bit confused but I just ordered an ASUS Z170-A motherboard and for Z170 it's 1151, not 1150 right? I took a Skylake / 6th gen Core i7 6700 (non 'K'). It supports DDR4 RAM but you've got two use 2x8 Gb, you cannot put a single 1x16 Gb in it. But maybe that ASUS Z170-A ain't the same as the Z170 you're thinking of?

YMMV but I'm regularly disk I/O bound (notably when manipulating huge files on my workstation) so to me the throughput of, say, a Samsung 950 Pro M.2 is going to be great while I wait for the newer Intel SSDs to arrive on the market. For a regular desktop / gaming machine I don't know how good they are but in random reads these new M.2 Samsung do 3x the IOPS of the "old" EVO ones. It's only the random write IOPS that aren't a big step forward (85 K IOPS vs 88 K IOPS from the bench I see). Also the endurance is 2.5x better than the older ones.

So despite what I read on the Internet like "These new Samsung M.2 Pro 950 don't bring anything new to the table, these benchmarks mean nothing", I decided to still "try it and see". But they're definitely not cheap compared to other SSDs. Once again: if I don't like it, I'll upgrade to the newer Intel once they come out.

[Moistgun]

.

Tapatalk fail

[Leslieann]

I use almost exclusively Intel, but why not consider AMD.
The Op doesn't exactly seem to NEED the power of a high end Intel processor for what he needs and that probably won't change any time soon considering he;s getting by on a C2D.

Makes more sense to me than trying to use a Xeon, or swapping processors or mobos at later date or even buying used parts off Ebay.

[SBJ]

I use almost exclusively Intel, but why not consider AMD.
The Op doesn't exactly seem to NEED the power of a high end Intel processor for what he needs and that probably won't change any time soon considering he;s getting by on a C2D.

Makes more sense to me than trying to use a Xeon, or swapping processors or mobos at later date or even buying used parts off Ebay.

The new AMD cpu's that are coming out might be worth a look at least.

[cmadrid]

The reviews for the new AMD 480 should be out in a few days now.. might as well wait a few days to see those before making a choice on GPU at least.

[davkol]

I've gone with (3), and I'm waiting for Zen.

[NewbieOneKenobi]

So far I'm leaning toward getting that SATA 3 SSD — possibly used 256 GB rather than hand-picked NIB 500/512/520 — given how it's going to be necessary in 3 out of 4 scenarios and certainly not a waste in the event of a full upgrade.  In a close case I'll opt for something that's NIB, comes from a real shop and has warranty.

Tempted to wait for Zen and Whateverisnextlake to duke it out and produce some interesting deals, though I'm a bit afraid that the release of another DDR4-compatible Intel chipset and one from AMD could lead to prices going up considerably for DDR4 in reaction to the surge in demand, which could make me regret the choice to wait.

[fohat.digs]

I use almost exclusively Intel, but why not consider AMD.

I have used AMD almost exclusively for at least a decade, even though I am generally agnostic in that sense.

I build computers one component at a time for myself and 2 teenage kids (trickle-down procedure - but with gamer-son getting gear at least as good as mine recently) and it just seems like whenever the time comes (there is a MicroCenter 15 minutes from my house and it is awesome in every conceivable way) there is always a deal on AMD-oriented stuff that is much better than comparable Intel kit.

So far I'm leaning toward getting that SATA 3 SSD — possibly used 256 GB rather than

Never buy a used SSD

[tp4tissue]

Ok.. SSD wise..  I don't think the price at this point is enough that you need to get --used.. 

But as long as the wear level which is listed in  SMART data checks out,  it should be fine..


Really, do not under any circumstances,  buy a premium ssd..  their advantage can not be realized in the client setting..



Waiting for Zen...  Possible, but only if you're buying into Mid-Range, like a 6600k instead of a 6700k..

Because If we add 40% ipc onto the current AMD top tier,  it's still ~15-25% behind intel..


So, when you consider TOTAL system cost,   INTEL is ALWAYS better..


But who knows.. maybe the new Zen gets magic powers in games or something..   so I can understand waiting..

[Leslieann]

So far I'm leaning toward getting that SATA 3 SSD — possibly used 256 GB rather than hand-picked NIB 500/512/520 — given how it's going to be necessary in 3 out of 4 scenarios and certainly not a waste in the event of a full upgrade.  In a close case I'll opt for something that's NIB, comes from a real shop and has warranty.

Tempted to wait for Zen and Whateverisnextlake to duke it out and produce some interesting deals, though I'm a bit afraid that the release of another DDR4-compatible Intel chipset and one from AMD could lead to prices going up considerably for DDR4 in reaction to the surge in demand, which could make me regret the choice to wait.

I've been doing this for decades, DO NOT wait for the next thing.
The main reason is that it's exorbitantly priced when fresh out of the gate, and by the time the price comes down to reasonable levels, the next thing will be announced. At some point you have to stop waiting and actually start buying.

Second, you don't always know what's coming and it doesn't always work like you expect or has a bug. The first Sandy Bridge had a serious bug, A recent AMD was more focused on database applications, and one of the last Intel was geared at workstations with a massively inflated price leaving those waiting to upgrade resorting to what they could have bought and been enjoying weeks or months ago.

Prices fluctuate, things evolve, basically, things are always in a state of flux. Buy the best you can afford, when you are ready to buy.

I use almost exclusively Intel, but why not consider AMD.

I have used AMD almost exclusively for at least a decade, even though I am generally agnostic in that sense.
I build computers one component at a time for myself and 2 teenage kids (trickle-down procedure - but with gamer-son getting gear at least as good as mine recently) and it just seems like whenever the time comes (there is a MicroCenter 15 minutes from my house and it is awesome in every conceivable way) there is always a deal on AMD-oriented stuff that is much better than comparable Intel kit.

I didn't mean that to sound like I dislike AMD, I run Intel because it just worked out that way, I have no problems with it on a desktop and I ran AMD for many years.

[davkol]

The technology is approaching physical limits around ~10 nm. There'll be Zen and a maybe a couple of minor upgrades, but we're waiting for a major breakthrough invention otherwise.

Meanwhile, stuff like OP's C2D still works reasonably well, and on the bright side, it doesn't have crap like Intel AMT to the extent of newer generations.

[NewbieOneKenobi]

I use almost exclusively Intel, but why not consider AMD.

I have used AMD almost exclusively for at least a decade, even though I am generally agnostic in that sense.

I build computers one component at a time for myself and 2 teenage kids (trickle-down procedure - but with gamer-son getting gear at least as good as mine recently) and it just seems like whenever the time comes (there is a MicroCenter 15 minutes from my house and it is awesome in every conceivable way) there is always a deal on AMD-oriented stuff that is much better than comparable Intel kit.

APUs or APU + discrete 270 (or whatever it is they used) seems to be a better deal than lower Pentiums with discrete nVidia cards. Up from there it starts looking bad for AMD, though, according to what I've seen, both on performance and power efficiency.

Never buy a used SSD

Any worse than an HDD? I thought  new-gen SSDs of recent make like Samsung Evo should be okay. Nope?

Ok.. SSD wise..  I don't think the price at this point is enough that you need to get --used..

Depends. Normally the saving isn't huge and certainly not attractive enough to trump NIB + normal shop invoice and all papers in order. But I've got a bunch of auctions here ending in some 10 hours from now. There's even an 256GB NVM from Samsung that might well finish around $160–170, conveniently some minutes after a used i5-6500 that's still well below the NIB price. I might want to combine the two, but it's impossible to predict where the prices will end at.

As for NIB, 250 costs exactly a half of 500 for 850 Evo, which is what I'd be getting (especially since I actually see some use for hardware AES).

But as long as the wear level which is listed in  SMART data checks out,  it should be fine..

Will ask. Today's candidates seem to be corporate misprocurements, though. Deemed too small by some suit or other. Buy a 500 GB SSD or 256 NVM and complain about size being too low… it probably takes a corporation to do that.

Really, do not under any circumstances,  buy a premium ssd..  their advantage can not be realized in the client setting..

Not games either?

Waiting for Zen...  Possible, but only if you're buying into Mid-Range, like a 6600k instead of a 6700k..

Because If we add 40% ipc onto the current AMD top tier,  it's still ~15-25% behind intel..

It would be really refreshing if AMD could pull something off that could actually compete, but I'm not holding my breath. Rather, opportunistically looking at a price opportunity once competition comes back to life.

So, when you consider TOTAL system cost,   INTEL is ALWAYS better..

Seems to almost always be the case, except for a limited range of budget gaming rigs. (Which is not where I'm at, at least not that kind.)

But who knows.. maybe the new Zen gets magic powers in games or something..   so I can understand waiting..

I honestly wish it could, though I mostly look forward to some price magic. But…

I've been doing this for decades, DO NOT wait for the next thing.
The main reason is that it's exorbitantly priced when fresh out of the gate, and by the time the price comes down to reasonable levels, the next thing will be announced. At some point you have to stop waiting and actually start buying.

Oh yeah…

Second, you don't always know what's coming and it doesn't always work like you expect or has a bug. The first Sandy Bridge had a serious bug, A recent AMD was more focused on database applications, and one of the last Intel was geared at workstations with a massively inflated price leaving those waiting to upgrade resorting to what they could have bought and been enjoying weeks or months ago.

Hmm… yes. And suppose Nextlake comes out with a bug or comes out worse than Skylake in games (like Skylake already is almost there vs Haswell), then prices of Skylake go up and Bridge & Has owners get smart.

Also, at least here Skylake 6600 and 6600K definitely has gone up in prices compared to just after release, just like nVidia 960. Lower models coming out and rounding out the offer removed the need for the top item to be attractively priced. People obediently looked to 6500 and 950, respectively, instead. I must remember that trick in my own client pricing.

Prices fluctuate, things evolve, basically, things are always in a state of flux. Buy the best you can afford, when you are ready to buy.

I've seen useful waiting windows, but predicting them is a gamble. Reminds you of how weather casters are said to be more accurate than stock-exchange analysts.

The technology is approaching physical limits around ~10 nm. There'll be Zen and a maybe a couple of minor upgrades, but we're waiting for a major breakthrough invention otherwise.

AMD has some 32-core tech ('Starship') and something more mainstream (IIRC) @ 7 mm, skipping 10 mm altogether. But it could end up like the cheap 8/16-cores we already know.

Meanwhile, stuff like OP's C2D still works reasonably well, and on the bright side, it doesn't have crap like Intel AMT to the extent of newer generations.

Yeah, it doesn't actually do that bad, though some games are cruel to it. My computer in Shogun 2 was like me on a jogging path. Well, it wasn't spitting physical blood, but you get the point.

Ironically, it's old single-core games that are giving it trouble.

Still, being somehow viable on an old platform is my consistent experience. My previous rig was an AMD 4000+ with 2 gigs of some of the fastest DDR1 around, which played well to the strengths of the CPU with relatively low CLs, and the 2600XT (AGP!) was a wonderful card. It had a socket 478 cooler mounted skew-wise on it with the aid of some cut-up LAN cable for spacing as the screws wouldn't go in normally. On top of that piece of designer copper sat a cute green fan with transparent frame from Coolermaster, being the only fan in the case apart from the one in PSU and the one on the GPU. I was unable to produce sufficient airflow for serious OC no matter what I did (and I did a lot, including a Prescott air duct with a fan on each side suspended on cords through 5.25'' bay to blow on the CPU, as there was no front-fan location), but at the same time a single silenced fan was somehow sufficient for non-OC. One of the quietest machines I've ever heard. Or rather not heard. It still works for a family member who doesn't need top speeds. Third user now after my younger brother. The only reason I replaced it was the fps drop after switching from 1280x1024 to 1680x1050 on an expensive LCD monitor I'd already bought. Otherwise I'd have used that machine for some years more on a 17'' CRT (nice, nice colours, though not as nice as my brother's last CRT used with the same PC).

And now I'm still tempted to keep the C2D alive as long as possible. I would definitely be doing it this way if I had good, compatible RAM. However, my RAM is 800 MHz (4x2GB) as opposed to the 1200 MHz non-OC the board supports (OC'd frequences go even higher), it runs hot and is either fault or hated by the mobo (non-QVL for it for sure). Unfortunately, DDR2 is and has been expensive, and I'm not going to spend $100 on just the same quantity of RAM I already have right now, especially if it too is non-QVL for my mobo.

There was even an auction on the weekend that had a Mushkin 2x2 GB set finish at $26 or so, but it was just one set of half my qty. For 2x4 GB or 4x2 GB at $50, I might have given in.

[NewbieOneKenobi]

Incidentally, if anybody's online, do you think i5-3570s is a good purchase for just under $100?

[tp4tissue]

Incidentally, if anybody's online, do you think i5-3570s is a good purchase for just under $100?

depends on what else comes in the box..

JUST for the cpu, it's not a good deal..


If you MUST buy used,  go for a 4xxx k series WITH motherboard.. talk um down to $300 for 46, $375-400 for a 47


THis is assuming it's a good motherboard..

If they're selling some crappy 4 phase motherboard.. reduce that by $80...   Or just don't buy it.. because cheapy motherboards are terrible for haswells

[NewbieOneKenobi]

CPU done. Landed a non-K 6600 for $184. For good or bad, I'm stuck with it now. The only reason I picked it is because a 6500 wouldn't have been cheaper and 6600K or 6700 is going to be more expensive, more wanted and more uncertain, often needing an additional cooler, while this thing here has box. There was earlier an i-3 6100 for a little more half that, though, which I may have chosen, but oh well.

Missed a nice auction for an Evo SSD, but oh well. Now gotta choose mobo and RAM. Congratulate me on skipping DDR3. Got any suggestions other than RTFQVL?

Mobo — Z170, four banks, high RAM OC, the more phases the merrier, M.2 or two, USB 3.1, just no overpaying for the adjective 'gaming' . Leaves me with Asus or Gigabyte… or Asrock. For some reason I'm inlined to go Asrock. They had a nice 10-phase board.

[TacticalCoder]

CPU done. Landed a non-K 6600 for $184. For good or bad, I'm stuck with it now. The only reason I picked it is because a 6500 wouldn't have been cheaper and 6600K or 6700 is going to be more expensive, more wanted and more uncertain, often needing an additional cooler, while this thing here has box. There was earlier an i-3 6100 for a little more half that, though, which I may have chosen, but oh well.

Missed a nice auction for an Evo SSD, but oh well. Now gotta choose mobo and RAM. Congratulate me on skipping DDR3. Got any suggestions other than RTFQVL?

Mobo — Z170, four banks, high RAM OC, the more phases the merrier, M.2 or two, USB 3.1, just no overpaying for the adjective 'gaming' . Leaves me with Asus or Gigabyte… or Asrock. For some reason I'm inlined to go Asrock. They had a nice 10-phase board.

Congrats on your Skylake deal!  I went for a Core i7-6700 (non 'K'), so max 65 W TDP too and Skylake too. I picked an ASUS Z170-A mobo: it's not expensive at all for what it does I think.

[tp4tissue]

CPU done. Landed a non-K 6600 for $184. For good or bad, I'm stuck with it now. The only reason I picked it is because a 6500 wouldn't have been cheaper and 6600K or 6700 is going to be more expensive, more wanted and more uncertain, often needing an additional cooler, while this thing here has box. There was earlier an i-3 6100 for a little more half that, though, which I may have chosen, but oh well.

Missed a nice auction for an Evo SSD, but oh well. Now gotta choose mobo and RAM. Congratulate me on skipping DDR3. Got any suggestions other than RTFQVL?

Mobo — Z170, four banks, high RAM OC, the more phases the merrier, M.2 or two, USB 3.1, just no overpaying for the adjective 'gaming' . Leaves me with Asus or Gigabyte… or Asrock. For some reason I'm inlined to go Asrock. They had a nice 10-phase board.

Non K...  Whyyyy......?

[NewbieOneKenobi]

Congrats on your Skylake deal!  I went for a Core i7-6700 (non 'K'), so max 65 W TDP too and Skylake too. I picked an ASUS Z170-A mobo: it's not expensive at all for what it does I think.

Thanks! Considered that one as well.

Non K...  Whyyyy......?

Suboptimal decision-making, I guess. I was tired and wired, it was a good deal financially, and I'd missed two or three processors earlier yesterday and two or three mobo+CPU deals over the weekend. In hindsight, I should have waited. Especially considering that in the several months to come I'm only going to play Dragon Age I expansions and Crusader Kings 2 with maybe a hint of car racing; otherwise work, work, work. And for work my current setup isn't bad already, it's only those choke moments that make me want to upgrade. So on the rational side I'd been pretty much resolved to wait and just get the SSD and maybe the Xeon and enjoy some 20-30% extra fps, which would already have been nice. I can already get 1080p on high (not ultra, usually at least) in most games, around 30 fps, which is fine by me.

In several hours there's a 6600K ending, so I might grab that and resell the non-K the moment it arrives, hoping not to lose too much on the deal.

[TacticalCoder]

Non K...  Whyyyy...... ?

It's a free world and people are free to do what they want. YMMVW but for me it's easy: max TDP 65W vs max TDP 91W means I've got way less to worry about cooling. I can use a Be Quiet! CPU cooler whose fan turns so slowly that I can actually read "Be Quiet!" on it while it's turning.

Also not everybody overclock because, well, once again people are free not to overclock. Take the i7 6700K / 4.0 Ghz with turbo boost of 0/0/0/2 vs the i7 6700 3.4 Ghz turbo boost of 3/4/5/6 meaning that in my case, where two cores are constantly (as in: 24h/24) doing some specific number crunching, I'd be at 4.0 Ghz for the K vs 3.9 Ghz for the non K.

So to me the deal was simple: as I don't plan to overclock, do I want a CPU a bit pricier, with 40% more max TDP for only 2.5% more perfs (in my case, with two cores running at 100%)?

Also if I'm not mistaken NewbieOneKenobi found a good deal on a non-K, not a good deal on a 'K', so that plays a role too.



And, lastly, AFAICT none of us are criticizing those choosing the 'K' version.

[NewbieOneKenobi]

It was a good deal I jumped on because I wasn't sure about the outcome of the auctions that follow and didn't have the nerve to watch through 20 of them before committing any. So I paid $184 for the 6600, and a while later a 6700 was sold for $217 and a K for $187, so a good argument could be made mine wasn't the best bargain, including versus a 6500 for $169 or even 6100 for $103.

I do regret the decision in hindsight in the light of the outcome today — with the K finishing at a coupla bucks more — but like I said, I didn't have the nerve or patience or just better sense to wait. The financial factor in not needing a cooler also mattered. This way I suppose my second CPU will be a K plus a new cooler unless I find a good bargain on a stronger non-K processor. Meanwhile I'll keep looking, and if I ever run into a used 6600K for close to what I'm going to get for my K, then I'll take it. Sooner or later that's probably bound to happen.

I might OC the non-K 6600 to some extent through FSB, especially if I'm lucky enough to find a thermalright bolt-through mounting kit somewhere cheap, for my Ultra, or scythe F.M.S.B.4 could work. FMSB4 is easier to find and cheaper, but I'm a bit worried the difference between 72x72 (775) and 75x75 (115-) with the resulting bad bolting angle could warp the fragile thing. Skylakes bend under some of the heavier coolers if the mounting mechanism isn't optimized for them. :/

Does U.2 look like something useful to have? Currently seems to be available only on MSI mobos.

[Hak Foo]

Ok.. SSD wise..  I don't think the price at this point is enough that you need to get --used.. 

But as long as the wear level which is listed in  SMART data checks out,  it should be fine..

The problem is that SSDs tend to fail fast and hard.  SMART data is frequently near meaningless for this sort of failure-- if you're lucky, the drive locks to read-only, but usually that's the last time you'll be able to access it, as the next time it powers up it will go fully dead.

[NewbieOneKenobi]

The problem is that SSDs tend to fail fast and hard.  SMART data is frequently near meaningless for this sort of failure-- if you're lucky, the drive locks to read-only, but usually that's the last time you'll be able to access it, as the next time it powers up it will go fully dead.

Ugh. That'd be something I couldn't afford. In some situations even frequent backups wouldn't do it for me due to the amount of important data generated in between scheduled back up points (even if there was a daily backup). This is not something serious enough to absolutely require RAID, but a WTF drive death would be outside my comfort limit. I'll probably get RAID anyway when my finances recover from the platform change.

Also, thanks for reminding me — I was aware there were expected death dates for SSDs, circa 8–10 years, it just hadn't sunk in.

If this makes any difference: My day-to-day use of the drive would look like this: I convert a .doc(x) (or .xls(x), editable PDF, whatever) file into an XML-based bilingual format to work with in Trados; that can by anything from 500 words and a dozen KB to thousands of words and a dozen MB. There is an autosave every 5 minutes. Meanwhile every sentence or paragraph I translate is immediately saved to an XML-based translation memory, essentially a primitive flat-file (single-file) database that can be either kilobytes or megabytes, but rarely above 2 MB. There's always a number of browser windows and tabs for research and checking, though that doesn't normally read to HDD writes. Plus mail and social media to stay on top of things and sometimes catch a second breath. After hours, it's almost always gaming, at least as far as any significant use of HDD/SSD goes.

I could justify paying a premium for sturdiness/longevity (access to warranty service or free replacement would be too late coming to solve my problems in case of drive death), though I'd normally replace the drive faster (e.g. after 5 years) than fork out the difference between Samsung 850 Evo and Samsung 850 Pro, for instance. Besides, with that premium being +100%, RAID does look like the better choice out of the two.

[fohat.digs]

I was aware there were expected death dates for SSDs, circa 8–10 years, it just hadn't sunk in.

My understanding is that it is 10K read/write cycles or something. My experience is that hard drives are astonishingly robust and seldom fail without warning.

[Leslieann]

Ugh. That'd be something I couldn't afford. In some situations even frequent backups wouldn't do it for me due to the amount of important data generated in between scheduled back up points (even if there was a daily backup). This is not something serious enough to absolutely require RAID, but a WTF drive death would be outside my comfort limit. I'll probably get RAID anyway when my finances recover from the platform change.

Also, thanks for reminding me — I was aware there were expected death dates for SSDs, circa 8–10 years, it just hadn't sunk in.

SSD  write times give them around 10 years of average use if you never fill it more than about 80% (never fill an ssd!). Spinnner drives can last 10 years or more even under harsh use, however, they start falling like rocks around the 4 year mark. Basically by year 6, you're on borrowed time and you can consider yourself lucky having beat the odds (around 75% are dead by this point). This is especially true in laptops.

Anyhow, regarding backups,
Something you may want to try is something like Google Drive that keeps them backed up online almost as soon as they are altered and keeps revisions. You may not be able to do it with all your files (15 gigs for free I think but you can pay for more) but would keep a running backup. Another option is a file server you can back up your files to (use an old system) on a 5 minute interval or something, this way you have two copies (Allway Sync would work for this and is adjustable for how and when it backs up). Better yet, setup a file server,  and then find a buddy across town you can trade data with. Crashplan makes it easy to back up remotely to a friend (after encryption), have a file server manage the off site backup so it relieves strain from your desktop. A bonus with a file server is you can shutdown your power hog desktop when not being used and still access your files from your phone or laptop, but also, it can take a load off your desktop while you are gaming. You can play, restart, watch movies, meanwhile it's handling the data, managing torrents, downloads, whatever. Setup properly, they can use as little as 25 watts of power. Total cost for the file server and off site backup, totally free if you have some old hardware laying around.

What I do is I trade data with an office I support, I have a server at both ends that handle it all (both built mostly from spare parts), however, they only swap critical data. Less critical, I have local backups on the servers, this way I'm not trying to sync  2Tb of data. I do multiple backups to each server all day, then one large offsite backup at night. I also use Megasync for files I want on my laptop, desktop, phone and tablet. It's 50gigs free, however uploads can be a bit slow compared to Google Drive and I don't think it does revisions, but that could also be a backup option for many of your files and then use Google for your high usage, high swap files.

By the way, raid is not a backup, it's fall-over in case a drive fails, and ONLY for a drive failure. There is lots of ways to lose all your drives at once, besides fire, flood, power spike or or lightening, I had a power supply decide to send 12volts down the 5 volt wires at random intervals. A server at my work had all 5 drives (mirrored) destroyed by a hacker after the server was used to DDOS Ebay (I wasn't the admin for that one). I also had a stick of ram go bad and corrupt all of the data on the drive, for weeks after I was finding damaged files (luckily I had backups), it was high enough to not effect windows since those files loaded first, but as soon as my ram usage spikes it would start using the corrupted section.

Personally, I wouldn't waste my time with raid on a desktop. It might give you a warm fuzzy feeling, but in my experience, it only leads to more points of failure, does very little for Windows performance (striped), and doesn't really protect you from much at all. Almost every sysadmin will tell you the same.

My understanding is that it is 10K read/write cycles or something. My experience is that hard drives are astonishingly robust and seldom fail without warning.

An SSD should give you some warning as it begins running out of space with writes remaining.
That said, I have a year old dead Crucial SSD sitting on my desk, still need to warranty it.

[NewbieOneKenobi]

Thanks, folks. I think I'll get the SM 951 256 GB M.2 simply because of the price unless a very attractively priced SATA 500 GB pops up. Obviously, I'll probably still be on a lookout for a storage drive if I get the 256 GB, just not this month or quarter, more like when my clients pay up.

Now, however, I need to choose a mobo. Obviously DDR4 only. The more phases the merrier, and the same goes for DDR4 frequencies. M.2's gotta be real 4-lane. Electrical safety is priority (poor old grid in my house doesn't enable much in the way of special goodness; rather, I need to protect myself from it), as is stability, low temps (poor airflow and hot summers) and huge heatsinks. Reinforced VGA slot, debug display and LAN optimization welcome but not indispensable. Prefer no wifi. Don't need great sound (though if it happens to be better than my discrete PCIE X-fi Titanium, then I could get rid of it for better cooling and maybe a buck or two on the side). USB 3.1 necessary but not necessarily in huge quantities. I'm not familiar with any reason why any of the boards should be better or worse with newer CPUs that Skylake for the 1151 slots, but obviously that would matter too if it were the case (including Xeons, obviously). Bad client service/RMA dodging would be an important factor, but I don't see a clear leader or loser here. I would prefer to totally rule out any particular mobo with a high DoA rate to cut my risks.

Oh, and I know some of the mobos may use screws and paste instead of plastic bolts and thermalpads for chipset and other cooling; that would, of course, be much the preferred way.

Asus (not a great choice here):
Z170-P (either NIB or used is available)
Z170-K used

Gigabyte:
Z170 Gaming K3
Z170 HD3P used (about $25 cheaper than most here)
GA-Z170X-GAMING 3 Z170X
Z170 XP-SLI

MSI:
Z170 Tomahawk
Z170-A used (about $25 cheaper than most here)
Z170 Gaming M3 used
Z170-A pro (not a fave)
PC Mate (not a fave)
Krait (not the cheapest of all, perhaps a bit more expensive)

Asrock:
Z170 Pro4S used (about $25 cheaper than most here)
Z170A-X1/3.1 used
FATAL1TY Z170 GAMING K4
FATAL1TY Z170 GAMING K6 (not the cheapest of all)
EXTREME 6+ (a bit more expensive)

Biostar:
GAMING Z170X Ver. 5.x (a bit more expensive)

Difference from the cheapest to the most expensive is within 25%, less after removing outliers.

Any favourites? Anything I should avoid?

EDIT: Inclined to rule out ASUS due to BIOS issues and Asrock due to larger GPUs blocking M.2. Out of MSI, probably skipping Krait and Mate. Not sure about M.2 blockage, but in any case the location of M.2 always seems to be less than ideal — as in somewhere hot and less than accessible. Above the GPU is more accessible but hotter and more difficult to cool with heatsinks and fans. Below GPU is less accessible but will at least benefit from GPU cooling if mounted in parallel to mobo. There doesn't seem to be any mobo with M.2 moved to the edge or mounted perpendicularly or something else that could help. :/

[tp4tissue]

for the motherboard.. look for 6 true phases on z170,   I think there might be motherboards with 8, but prolly not as many as older platforms.

4phase with doubler is not the same as 6 phases..

[TacticalCoder]

EDIT: Inclined to rule out ASUS due to BIOS issues...

Got my rig (i7 6700 / 16 GB of RAM, M.2 Samsung Pro 950), it's working flawlessly and way speedier than the 3rd gen i5 it's replacing. What's the BIOS issues with the Asus?

I've got an ASUS Z170-A and Linux install went flawlessly (I used the latest Debian Stretch alpha though: to be sure to support the latest chipsets).

The M.2 is very neatly located on the Z170-A I think.

Price between the ASUS Z170-A and ASUS Z170-K is nearly the same but the 'A' has more features I think (and it's an 8+2):

 http://www.custompcguide.net/the-differences-between-all-asus-mainstream-z170-motherboards/

My usage is different: no external GPU... I'm fine the integrated GPU (and it's DisplayPort connector). I've got a modular GPU and, well, zero of the modular cables connected: no SDD (besides the M.2 one), no DVD reader/writer, no nothing. The PSU's fan isn't starting. CPU temp with two cores running @ full speed 24/7 is 53 deg celsius and the CPU cooler is so quiet I cannot even tell if the computer is on or not. It's the quietest computer I ever had.
 
I've read some people had issues installing Windows on the M.2 SSD but I'm only running Linux and everything worked on the first try.

[Darkshado]

The one gotcha I encountered on the Asus Z170-A and an M.2 SSD was that the default setting in the BIOS is SATA Express and has to be changed.

[TacticalCoder]

The one gotcha I encountered on the Asus Z170-A and an M.2 SSD was that the default setting in the BIOS is SATA Express and has to be changed.

I had read about that too but... I didn't change anything and I did tests yet I'm getting throughput in sustained read that are about 4x the max theoretical limit of Sata 3 (and sustained writes are crazy fast too: 2x above Sata limit), so I don't think it's running in Sata mode. I'll double-check in the BIOS to be sure that said.

I think you have to be careful once you plug Sata SSDs and DVDs on that mobo: for example if you plug a DVD in the Sata plug labelled "OS drive" it can break havoc. But in my case I've got zero Sata device and it's working perfectly. And you can "block" Sata ports by plugging in a M.2 drive. But in my case as I've got no Sata devices I didn't pay attention to that.


EDIT: Read too fast... Sata Express is faster than Sata 3.0. I just went into the BIOS anyway, set it to "M.2" (thanks for the tip) and relaunched my benchmarks: same speed as previously. Not too sure what that is changing. Overall anyway I'm very very very happy with my rig because this thing just flies 

[Darkshado]

IIRC (it's been a few months) I had been able to install Windows 10 with the default setting but subsequently got a BSOD at boot. We had to RMA our board two weeks ago (started rebooting on its own) and the new one BSOD'ed the first time I tried booting it because of that setting.

[TacticalCoder]

IIRC (it's been a few months) I had been able to install Windows 10 with the default setting but subsequently got a BSOD at boot. We had to RMA our board two weeks ago (started rebooting on its own) and the new one BSOD'ed the first time I tried booting it because of that setting.

I, selfishly, hope it's related to Windows (and I had read stuff going that way before being mine) as I'm running Linux-only

Time will tell: I'll definitely notice should the thing start rebooting on its own seen that my workstation is up 24/7 doing number-crunching.



In any case thanks for all the infos and warnings: should I get spurious reboots, I now know I won't waste my time trying to figure out how to fix it and simply buy another mobo altogether.

[NewbieOneKenobi]

I like the Asus Z170-A based on benchmarks and tests, but — apart from reduced availability in my neck of the woods and resulting artificial premium on the price when you do find it, it has only one BIOS stick, and I'd rather have two, just in case. Other than the A from Asus, I think Asrock is the only company to put a lot of phases on a budget/value-range mobo. However, Gigabyte is the only one that makes external CPU clock regulators easily identifiable, and that's something useful to have with non-K processors, I guess, though I'm not sure if even that isn't being disabled via microcode on Intel's command.

I'm tempted to just take the cheapest Z170 mobo that's available, like Asrock pro4s or Gigabyte Z170-HD3P, and put the premium elsewhere, as Tissue would put it. Either this or get a second-hand (near-NIB anyway, at this point) K6/extreme6 from Asrock for something more high-end.

[Darkshado]

I like the Asus Z170-A based on benchmarks and tests, but — apart from reduced availability in my neck of the woods and resulting artificial premium on the price when you do find it, it has only one BIOS stick, and I'd rather have two, just in case.

Availability is a good argument to pick something else.

On the other hand, ruling it out because of a single BIOS chip? Do you tinker with custom BIOSes? The Z-170A has a header to reprogram the chip that looks like a modified SPI for their optional "flashback" card.


TacticalCoder: I eventually installed Mint alongside with rEFInd.

As far as spurious reboots were concerned, I ran a couple of stress tests (Memtest, Prime95, Kombustor) and was getting to the point I'd have to start swapping parts to isolate the culprit, took it to a store for some additional diagnostics and their test program (was sent a photo, turns out it's Eurosoft PC-Check) reported some DMA Controller and system timer failures. With that information passed along to Asus in their RMA form, they replaced it without any issue.

[NewbieOneKenobi]

All right, mobo bought. Picked Fatal1ty K6. Used, but sold by a company with 12 months of warranty, I'll survive.

SSD bought — a 951 that was replaced on day 1 by an expensive laptop buyer.

Still need to choose RAM and along with Windows (10, after all) that will complete the necessary minimum.

There's obviously still the question of case and storage, but it isn't terribly pressing right now.

For case, candidates include Phanteks Enthoo Pro, Corsair Carbide 400R, Fractal R4 Black Pearl, and anything that can fit up to say 33–34 cm GPU and fit an SSD drive somewhere but otherwise skips the storage section and has intake front fans right off the edge of the mobo.

For storage, that's probably going to be a 480 MB or higher SATA-based SSD some time, and/or an encrypted external drive. Not now, though, later.

Regarding RAM, I'm inclined to go 1.2V and avoid overheating, based on my experience with the A-DATA DDR2 sticks in my current computer always being so awfully hot, but I won't sweat the difference between 1.2 and 1.35, obviously. Right now the choice is among a supercheap Hyper-X Savage 16 GB stick at $60 vs 8x2 of something faster up to $90. But 8x2 prettyu much starts at around $80. Hence I think I'll stick with my initial idea, just get another similar stick later for 32 GB total. Otherwise I'd be going for RipJaws or SuperLuce.

On the other hand, ruling it out because of a single BIOS chip? Do you tinker with custom BIOSes?

Rarely, but yeah, I've done that. There is a 99% chance I wouldn't need it, but if the BIOS died on me and disabled my computer for even a couple of days, that could be a nightmare. On the other hand, the cost of taking a cab and taxiing my ass somewhere along with the price of the chip and the service would probably be on par with the difference in price.

But I think the Fatal1ty 6 shouldn't be worse anyway. And if yes, then not by a huge margin.

The Z-170A has a header to reprogram the chip that looks like a modified SPI for their optional "flashback" card.

Didn't know that. A bit beyond my usual paygrade.

[Leslieann]

IIRC (it's been a few months) I had been able to install Windows 10 with the default setting but subsequently got a BSOD at boot. We had to RMA our board two weeks ago (started rebooting on its own) and the new one BSOD'ed the first time I tried booting it because of that setting.

Win10, like every major Windows upgrade, has been killing lots of hardware.
Usually it's driver issues or failing hardware being pushed that causes this, it's not necessarily Windows itself.

While a bad driver can kill hardware, it's actually pretty rare. On the other hand, any time you stress a system, especially older ones, or one that has never been stressed, you run a risk of killing it. These days the hardest the average home computer is pushed is when streaming movies using Flash. I've killed systems just running MalwareBytes and Superanti-spyware, imagine how hard an OS upgrade taxes it.

I've reached a point now where if I question it, I pull a backup before I even start cleaning malware and I think I've done 3 OS upgrades in as many years for people. It's just too risky on any system much more than a year old.

[Moistgun]

Just wanna jump in and say I have a rx 480 and am having some issues.

Fans aren't ramping when gaming in over watch, haven't had the time to test more in depth yet.

[cmadrid]

Can't install OS upgrades on a system over a year old?? Do you install them with a hammer

[Darkshado]

If your machine can't withstand proper stress tests, something is wrong with it. Period.

This one's running on its third Windows and has gone through a couple of Linux Mint upgrades as well, dist-upgrade style. (i.e. the one they advise against ) Since it's a laptop and because of my usage, it's been regularly run at "scary" temps (high nineties °C) and yet it has been ticking along, trouble free, for four years already.

[Leslieann]

Can't install OS upgrades on a system over a year old?? Do you install them with a hammer

That was in reference to upgrading other people's computers.
I didn’t say you can’t, I said it’s risky on an older system, especially one you're unfamiliar with.

If your machine can't withstand proper stress tests, something is wrong with it. Period.

Again, I was referring to other people's computers.
Knowing it was faulty after the fact might help you sleep better at night, but is small consolation for someone when they just lost baby pictures and their only working computer. Most people have crap sh*t for computers, usually cheap off the shelf garbage engineered to last 2-3 years before it falls apart.

Now my own computers, absolutely, I do OS swaps all the time. BUT, I'm prepared for what can happen, I have good backups, spare hardware, know what I'm doing, and I'm not paying someone to do it for me.  Someone else though, that could be their livelihood you just crashed and they may not have backups (seriously, I'm actually surprised when someone or a business has backups, because of how rare it is) or be able to afford to repair it. In which case, you don't mess with it.

[NewbieOneKenobi]

Just for the record, my lovely Core2Duo rig that's about to retire managed for 8 years without a reinstall. And that including an upgrade from Vista to 7. I probably should have reinstalled, but I've always been terrified of reinstalling all the software, especially what I've misplaced the CDs/DVDs for, and that's quite a lot of software, like Neverwinter Nights 1 or something of the sort, for which the DVD (or CD, even) might not even work if found. I might actually upgrade it to 10 for the glorious achievement of third system with no reinstall. And perhaps get some OCZ Reapers 1066 MHz CL4 for $100, resulting in 4.7ns real latency (better than most DDR3 and DDR4 configs, to which my DDR2/800/4 was already equal @ 5 ns).

Actually, makes me feel bad about the Skylake upgrade. I probably should've upgraded to Win 10, bought a windowed case, a Xeon and an SSD and soldiered on for the sake of principle. I know I would be able to get 30 fps/high (my personal sweet spot) only in some modern games, not all, but heck, I've still got at least 2-3 years' worth of games from 2012–2013 to play.

But who am I kidding… the slowness in web browsers, work applications etc. was noticeable, though I still subjectively feel like it's a strong machine, perhaps because of the 60-ish fps I'm getting in DX9 games in the right condition and the high-end feel of certain parts in it, notably the lapped Wolfie doing >4 GHz and just touching 40 degrees Celsius on Thermalright Ultra.

Meanwhile: The mobo has already been replaced. Same model due to OEM restrictions, but not my original mobo. It happened this winter. The CPU was replaced 1–2 years ago (from e7200 to e8600, topping out the slot, though I should've opted for a Xeon instead back then). Third graphics card. RAM was replaced, expanded later (1–2 years ago, I think). The X-fi also has not been there since the beginning. So only HDD and DVD are original inhabitants of the chassis, which is the third veteran. So I guess I'm deluding myself about continuity.

Sorry, I got a little nostalgic.

I'd been similarly obstinate with DDR1 & AGP. I'd survived all the way to 4000+ (originally Intel 478 from about 2002 IIRC: Celeron 2.4 GHz, through PIV HT; I mounted the 478 cooler on socket 939 with spacers made from cutting a LAN cable) back when AMDs was reportedly benefiting greatly from low CLs (vs Intel from frequencies), which I was happy to provide (having gone all the way from 1, 2 to 4 sticks of 512MB Kingston Value Ram; DDR2 had poor CLs back at the time), as well as Radeon 2600XT (Riva TNT2 32 MB => FX5900XT (still in service) => GT7600 (died on warranty) => 2600XT (free upgrade; died only recently)). But when I replaced my last CRT monitor in spring 2008, with an awfully expensive 20'' TN @ 1680*1050, the fps began to fall below my comfort level, so I ended up building the current rig. My AGP/DDR1 rig continued to serve my younger brother for a while (on a 17'' CRT from Philips, with wonderful colours, purchased for $8), until he got a laptop and never looked back. The single-core/DDR1/AGP rig still works in family. Still on XP. It's no longer mine, though, because the title was conveyed for a grand total of $25 a couple of years ago just to make sure I would never again try to take it back.

I think the 5900XT was responsible for the beginning of my thing for second-hand formerly hi-end hardware. It was a 256-bit card with a huge single fan and a couple of small heatsinks on RAM chips and OC-ed by a far margin with no issues, unlike almost all of my subsequent cards.

An era is ending.

But guess what. I'll probably keep the Ultra, just use a multi-hole backplate hack. Should be more than enough for any Skylake, let alone a 65 TDP non-K (mobo has an external clock chip and hopefully a sensor that can't be fooled by the non-K intel temperature read nonsense).

[tp4tissue]

Just wanna jump in and say I have a rx 480 and am having some issues.

Fans aren't ramping when gaming in over watch, haven't had the time to test more in depth yet.

Set fan speed manually then..

[Leslieann]

Just for the record, my lovely Core2Duo rig that's about to retire managed for 8 years without a reinstall.

Oh, you're one of them...

[SBJ]

Just for the record, my lovely Core2Duo rig that's about to retire managed for 8 years without a reinstall.

Oh, you're one of them...

Show Image

My friend does this. He's been telling me for YEARS he needs to install win10 or reinstall. Just never happens.