-
Hey, guest user. Hope you're enjoying NeoGAF! Have you considered registering for an account? Come join us and add your take to the daily discourse.
"I Need a New PC!" 2015 Part 1. Read the OP and RISE ABOVE FORGED PRECISION SCIENCE
- Thread starter Hazaro
- Start date
- Status
Of course. i figured it could help future SSD buyers. As you and RGM79 pointed out the problem is not gone. I had run a performance test about one month ago and everything was fine so the problem has returned sometime in the last 30 days. With that said, here are the results:
OS SSD
Game Installs SSD
As you can see, the non-OS drive is unaffected. I wonder how long that will last or if the problem depends on OS install.
Hope this helps anyone considering a build anytime soon.
LiquidMetal14
hide your water-based mammals
I have only used Kingston for memory and they always deliver on that front. Currently have their HyperX Predator DDR4 3000mhz 4x4 kit and it's as solid as ever.
Kingston memory has been dependable for me as well. Still, the shady stuff they pulled with the SSDs was not cool.
So my point would be it'd be hard to be comfortable recommending it when their last two TLC drives have has severe slowdowns and this one is too new to see if it's also susceptible to this. Crucial's drives are a safer bet.
LiquidMetal14
hide your water-based mammals
I got a 250gb 850 Evo. This was the first bench results after putting my rig together.
M.2 for comparison
You got the SSD recently, right?
Mad Season
Banned
Returned razer ultimate for corsair k70
If there are to be any issues with it they won't maidesr themselves for a few months yet. A fresh drive will show no signs of slowdown.
Mad Season
Banned
I went to 980 from 7950 and its night and day
Great, but it ain't $250.
Is the K70 readily available in the US? It's really hard to find up here in Canada (atleast the RGB Browns are)
LiquidMetal14
hide your water-based mammals
About 2 weeks ago, yes.NoRéN;154072964 said:
I might be taking this thing back then.
Just to be sure, the OS SSD is on a SATA3 connector? Those speeds are usually seen on a SATA2.NoRéN;154071908 said:Of course. i figured it could help future SSD buyers. As you and RGM79 pointed out the problem is not gone. I had run a performance test about one month ago and everything was fine so the problem has returned sometime in the last 30 days. With that said, here are the results:
OS SSD
Game Installs SSD
As you can see, the non-OS drive is unaffected. I wonder how long that will last or if the problem depends on OS install.
Hope this helps anyone considering a build anytime soon.
Hoho for breakfast
Member
That's insane. I knew nothing about this until reading that article because of this thread. I'll never buy Kingston again. Unreal.
It's not guaranteed to happen to the 850 Evo but with it happening to the 840 and 840 Evo it does make me wary.
What kharma said. Happens once you have "old" data on it. So, the problem won't show up for another couple of months. And my SSDs have the firmware update fix applied so as you can see the problem has returned. Shame but there are alternatives that we can recommend fellow PC builders
Mad Season
Banned
pretty much. My local FRY's had 20 of them
Lockjaw333
Member
I love my K70, but I'm curious- why did you return the razer ultimate?
Sanctuary
Member
I have a question about overclocking. Not actually how to do it (I've been doing it for over a decade), but rather what opinions are on the gamble actually being worth it anymore, especially with Haswell. For a while now it's been said that the GPU is going to have more of an impact on framerates than the CPU, and as long as they are both around a similar generation this seems to be true for most games. Sure, some games do gain a larger benefit by having an overclocked CPU, but most just don't. An increase of 2-10 average frames sometimes doesn't seem worth the effort, especially when your lowest frames per second should be the most important factor. This is for gaming of course. For other applications overclocking does have more tangible benefits, but most overclock in a gaming system for games, not file compression or CAD.
I have an i5 750 in the PC I built in 2009. Its default speed is 2.6ghz and I have it at 4.2ghz on a good air cooler. This chip overclocked very well for me, and it's only an average overclock. Yet the PC I built at the end of 2013 with an i5 4670k will only overclock to 4.1ghz with a 1.25 vcore, which is pure and utter garbage considering it can boost to 3.8ghz without additional voltage. I also spent $90 for one of the best AIO water cooling enclosures because I was tired of having to deal with heavy and sharp heatsinks and the noise. While I don't regret buying the AIO due to how quiet my system is, I am pretty bitter about the crap chip I ended up with during the Haswell lottery, when I could have simply purchased a better performing i7 and simply used the stock cooler (which is trash, but it's more than sufficient if you aren't overclocking and it's quiet).
Anyway, my question is: is it really worth paying "less" for a chip that has the potential to overclock well, factoring in the cost of a good aftermarket cooler that will actually be sufficient in the off chance you get a high overclocker, compared to simply paying $50 - $80 more for a chip that's guaranteed to be faster in the first place without having to bother with overclocking, and where the stock cooler is enough? I just built a new system for a friend who I don't trust with an aftermarket heatsink (he's going to be transporting the system in his car frequently) and I noticed that even during an hour and a half of prime95, the default cooler was keeping his 4670 below 63C with the two additional top fans I mounted.
I have an i5 750 in the PC I built in 2009. Its default speed is 2.6ghz and I have it at 4.2ghz on a good air cooler. This chip overclocked very well for me, and it's only an average overclock. Yet the PC I built at the end of 2013 with an i5 4670k will only overclock to 4.1ghz with a 1.25 vcore, which is pure and utter garbage considering it can boost to 3.8ghz without additional voltage. I also spent $90 for one of the best AIO water cooling enclosures because I was tired of having to deal with heavy and sharp heatsinks and the noise. While I don't regret buying the AIO due to how quiet my system is, I am pretty bitter about the crap chip I ended up with during the Haswell lottery, when I could have simply purchased a better performing i7 and simply used the stock cooler (which is trash, but it's more than sufficient if you aren't overclocking and it's quiet).
Anyway, my question is: is it really worth paying "less" for a chip that has the potential to overclock well, factoring in the cost of a good aftermarket cooler that will actually be sufficient in the off chance you get a high overclocker, compared to simply paying $50 - $80 more for a chip that's guaranteed to be faster in the first place without having to bother with overclocking, and where the stock cooler is enough? I just built a new system for a friend who I don't trust with an aftermarket heatsink (he's going to be transporting the system in his car frequently) and I noticed that even during an hour and a half of prime95, the default cooler was keeping his 4670 below 63C with the two additional top fans I mounted.
Paying less for an OC chip? You get the i5 K or i7 K.
Current CPUs will be anywhere from 15-30% faster in same clock speeds and clock slightly higher (4.3Ghz-4.4Ghz avg, your 750 at 4.2Ghz is great).
Yes, I would suggest any of the 'K' CPUs. Even if you don't overclock it's easier to sell later.
Sanctuary
Member
Eh, this is assuming someone actually cares about selling a chip in the future. Outside of enthusiasts/hobbyists, how many people actually resell them? I've been building my own systems since 2000 and I've not sold a single part, although I have given away entire computers that I no longer have any use for and that are ancient compared to what I might currently need.
Not factoring in reselling, the bolded part above is what I'm talking about. You don't know that you're going to be getting that magical 30% golden chip. It's a gamble, and yet you already have to commit to the cost of an aftermarket cooler that can handle that unlikely potential. Instead of simply paying the difference for a chip that's better to begin with. While you still may have actually gotten lucky with a good overclocker, the odds are you won't on average. Not if Haswell is a sign of the way Intel is going to continue to manufacture their chips in the future.
QueenOfThorns
Member
I assume this is bad. The fire implies that it's bad.
I've went in there with a compressed air thing and dusted the best I could but it still gives me these temps. Are both my CPU and GPU about to die? I've had both for about..3/4 years. i5-2500k and 560ti.
Sanctuary
Member
I assume this is bad. The fire implies that it's bad.
I've went in there with a compressed air thing and dusted the best I could but it still gives me these temps. Are both my CPU and GPU about to die? I've had both for about..3/4 years. i5-2500k and 560ti.
You might have an issue, but it's more likely that Speedfan is just not working correctly. I've seen similar things on a system I just built recently. I then took the same version of Speedfan and used it on a system I built a year ago that I know doesn't have any issues and I was seeing two fires on the same screen.
Try HWMonitor instead if you are just checking temps.
QueenOfThorns
Member
Ahh, I should have mentioned that games are running extremely poorly for me too. Low FPS to the point of being unplayable. Can't really use the video preview in Sony Vegas the way I used to either. Used to be able to just preview video and watch it from there at a decent framerate but now it's pretty bad most of the time. I've been struggling to figure out exactly what's causing it. The OS is fresh, drivers up to date, that kinda stuff. So I was actually kind of hoping this would be right haha. As at least then I'd know what's up.
I'll try that other program.
Edit: Screenshot of that other program:
It looks to be about the same? But looks like it has more information at least. Not sure if any of it is bad or not.
I'd like to know some specifics about your situation. What air cooler were you using before, and what AIO cooler did you buy? Motherboard model? BIOS settings?
I agree that you should buy hardware to suit your situation, but do you know how much faster the i7 processor is compared to an i5 4670K?
What i7 are you comparing the 4670K/4690K to? An i7 on the same socket 1150 platform? Something like the 4770K and 4790K costs more but generally comes out better than i5 in certain situations that make use of i7's hyperthreading, mostly programs that can make use of more than 4 threads. The i5 and i7 CPUs on socket 1150 are both quad core processors so the potential performance is similar. You'd be paying $50~80 for a marginal improvement in some applications, or in the case of many games, little to no improvement at all. While I understand you have issues overclocking the 4670K, you are never required to spend that much money on a cooler. The Cooler Master Hyper 212 Plus/Evo is a popular cooler costing $30 or less that has been used to successfully overclock many i5 K model processors to at least 4GHz.
You do realize the when Intel says X CPU can boost to max Y speed, it's only for 1 Core. The more cores is use the less the max speed will be. Generally, if all cores are being used, the max boost is only .1-.2GHz more. While, even a slight OC, it will offer faster speeds on ALL cores than max 1 core boost.
And, you don't need a tower cooler for a moderate OC. I move my old 2600K@4.5GHz with 212+ cooler to HTPC case with low profile cooler and it's still running at the same OC. Since your friend plans to move his PC around often, go with one of those.
Mad Season
Banned
NoRéN;154084505 said:Guys! i fixed the problem!
Not really. Rapid Mode is enabled
Now, I have no experience with this. What is the process like to use a new SSD as the OS drive? Reinstall windows? Clone drive?
how diid u fix?
Mad Season
Banned
didnt like the clicky sound so much and i still had 30 days to return it. heard a lot about k70 so i returned razer for it. i LOVE it
Lockjaw333
Member
Glad you like it bud. Have to admit I really did like the clicky razer greens in store, but I knew it would drive myself and my wife insane eventually.
I think the K70 is a huge step up in terms of build quality. What switch did you get?
Sanctuary
Member
In my 2009 system I have a Scythe Ninja, which is relatively quiet compared to whatever it was I was using in my 2006, 2003 and 2000 systems. The issue is that each new heatsink would end up larger than the previous and I decided that it was time to move on to a quieter and easier to move around cooling solution. I ended up getting a Kraken x60. Temperatures are not what is holding me back anyway until I start going beyond 1.32 vcore (which I shouldn't need to be doing in the first place to go beyond 4.1ghz). I'm not sure why listing my bios settings is relevant if you simply take my word that I have experience overclocking. Regardless, the motherboard is the Asus Maximus VI Gene. I've had plenty of success in the past, usually averaging around a 30% - 40% OC, and in the case of the i5 750 a 50% gain. My current chip gained a whopping 10%. The average being around 4.3ghz is not actually that great either.
edit: apparently I gained up to a 19% boost on applications that use all four cores (which are none of the games I own).
My question wasn't a general "Is overclocking really worth it?". It has been worth it, but is it worth it on average now, and if things don't change will it matter much in the future?
I don't even remember the specific model of what I was using in my 2006 system, but it was essentially a CM Hyper design. Regardless, who cares about a 4ghz overclock on a chip that boosts to 3.8ghz? That's nothing, and I'm not sure anyone who is actually trying to get a good overclock would settle for a cooler that will cool just a 200mhz - 300mhz overclock. That kind of overclock won't make any noticeable difference at all. Benchmarks are meaningless if the end user can't actually tell any discernable difference in the applications they want to go faster.
He doesn't have a K model, so he's not going to be overclocking. I might presuade him to get a low profile fan (which is actually what I was going to suggest if the stock fan didn't cut it), but he spent more than his budget for stupid reasons, so he probably wouldn't be getting a new fan anytime soon. And no, I didn't realize that the boost was only for one core. Regardless, my current OC is still rather shit, and on all of the in game benchmarks I've run, show an improvement between 0 - 6 frames per second. That's the average--which means I may as well have not even bothered. This was never the case with the previous generations. Maybe I was just lucky until now?
Oh, don't take it the wrong way, I wasn't questioning your experience, I just wanted to know what your setup was that made you leap from an air cooler to a water cooler. High end air coolers aren't very far off from water coolers, and depending on the model, are usually more quiet than most high end water coolers due to having slower fans. Certain lower cost motherboards wouldn't overclock very well and high vcore would necessitate higher end cooling. Also, the 4670K was a disappointment to those expecting higher overclocking than Ivy Bridge.
We're already moving away from Haswell, so the future of Intel's chips (Broadwell, Skylake, Cannonlake, etc) remain to be seen. Haswell Refresh seems to be doing well, there are overclocks in the range of 4.8GHz and even slightly higher, although silicon lottery and processor binning is always in effect and so results vary. Of course, higher overclocking means more heat and better cooling is needed, but 4.5Ghz seems readily achievable by the current set of K series processors.
Intel Turbo boost doesn't apply to all cores. To get around the fact that higher clock speeds mean more heat, only 1~2 cores run at the higher clock speed. The 4670K not overclocking very well is less to do with the cooler and more about the CPU just not being suitable. Besides, that $30 cooler will handle the 4690K at up to 4.5GHz.
I don't really trust that i7 processors at stock speeds are that much faster to render overclocking an i5 processor meaningless for the cost. Cost of CPU performance for the price always has diminishing returns for the more money that higher end processors cost, especially moving up from i5 to i7 and even moreso for going from the consumer socket 1150 platform to the enthusiast socket 2011/2011-v3 platform.
ThoseDeafMutes
Member
Which 980? And which 680 did you have?
The card length and width vary, but if you look up the model it should be listed.
Evga's, gtx 680 sc and just ordered the gtx980 sc acx2.0.
Edit. This card should last me 2 years right, 1080p 60fps? I Wanted to do a full rebuild next year or whenever sky lake is out, but I wanted a new Gpu. Borderlands 2 was running like trash on the 680 and sent me over the hill.
What case do you have? The EVGA GTX 980 SC ACX2.0 (266mm) is a bit longer than the GTX 680 SC (254mm).
http://www.nzxt.com/product/detail/105-source-210-case.html
Nzxt.
Wow I'm cheap when it comes to cases .
You already had to move the drive bays out of the way to make room for your GTX 680, right? You'll be fine with the GTX 980, it'll fit in that case.
And yeah, that GTX 980 will be good for around two years.
Awesome, thanks buddy!
Mad Season
Banned
Check the spoiler. I didn't fix anything, just enabled samsung's rapid mode thing which uses RAM to boost performance.
Lockjaw333
Member
I got reds as well. Pretty sweet.thanks! beautiful cherry mx redyou?
makeitawkward
Member
Astro A50
But wouldn't I have to use their amp? That would be bothersome swapping it back and forth.
Chinbo37
Member
So dumb question (seems like all my questions are dumb).
I havent used a sound card since like 1998. I have an older receiver with no HDMI in, so I bought an Asus Xonar to install and I will run analog out of my sound card to my receiver and let my sound card decode all DD or DTS 5.1 etc, and just use my receiver as an amp.
As I havent installed a sound card in so long, what do I do, just install it and install teh drivers? I mean, should I disable onboard sound? Will they conflict? Can I switch between my sound card and onboard easily if I leave it enabled? Right now I have been using my TV speakers as my sound setup would be nice to keep those as a backup.
I havent used a sound card since like 1998. I have an older receiver with no HDMI in, so I bought an Asus Xonar to install and I will run analog out of my sound card to my receiver and let my sound card decode all DD or DTS 5.1 etc, and just use my receiver as an amp.
As I havent installed a sound card in so long, what do I do, just install it and install teh drivers? I mean, should I disable onboard sound? Will they conflict? Can I switch between my sound card and onboard easily if I leave it enabled? Right now I have been using my TV speakers as my sound setup would be nice to keep those as a backup.
Frankfurter
Member
To make sure that there are no conflicts, you should disable the onboard sound in the BIOS/UEFI, although normally this shouldn't be an issue.
Imo you shouldn't try to use both sound cards at the same time, I'm not even sure if that's possible.
I'm also pretty sure that you'll get better sound by using an optical cable instead of the analog outs.
- Status