Building a computer

[itroitnyah]

Update!

I've decided to buy the parts and assemble the computer myself. Before this edit, I was talking about getting a 3.4GHz quad core, and I've since changed my mind. List of all the parts I'll be getting below.

Processor: AMD FX-6300
Motherboard: BIOSTAR A880GZ
Power supply: Corsair CX430
Harddrive: This one
Optical Drive: LITE-ON one
Soundcard: Creative Sound
Memory: G.SKILL 8GB
Videocard: Radeon HD 6670
Case: Rosewill Challenger

I'm 99.99% certain that all the parts are compatible, so if you see otherwise, or if there's a flaw in the combination of parts I'll be getting, feel free to tell me.

When I get this job and buy all the parts and assemble, I might come back to this thread and update on how well it's working. In the mean time, thanks to anybody who posted advice and tips!

[Bready]

I have no idea about how it would go in the higher end of music production but I can imagine it would do fine (with a good sound card of course). I'm running pretty much the same specs but with 4GB extra RAM and things like After Effects and Vegas etc. run like a dream when editing something a little more intense than some things (i.e. DRAGONTURKEY). In fact, I'd go as far as to say that specs like that could run pretty much anything (bar graphically intensive things like games). Of course I could be completely wrong as I know very little of music production.

[itroitnyah]

I have no idea about how it would go in the higher end of music production but I can imagine it would do fine (with a good sound card of course). I'm running pretty much the same specs but with 4GB extra RAM and things like After Effects and Vegas etc. run like a dream when editing something a little more intense than some things (i.e. DRAGONTURKEY). In fact, I'd go as far as to say that specs like that could run pretty much anything (bar graphically intensive things like games). Of course I could be completely wrong as I know very little of music production.

Well, it does run really well, and the only time I ever get lag on it is when the internet connection plays a big role.

But, I cranked up one of my synths just now, and it sounds a lot better, but it takes up 30% processor power. So I can't really run more than 3 synths at a time without lagging a bunch So I'm definitely going to need to get a really nice and powerful processor.

[XXDarkShadow79XX]

Dude, I just use my Alienware X51.

...

Not entirely sure of what to think of myself.

[the4thImpulse]

On a simple level there are two things that are VERY important when building/buying a computer for music production; your processor and your ram.

The processor runs all your applications; your DAW and VST's (plugins) have little to do with your RAM. If your making electronic music (not just EDM but any music made with computers (not recorded)) then a processor is going to be where you want to go all out. The more you can run at a time the better off you are when making electronic music. Seriously don't go cheap here.

RAM is what your audio will use up; samples and recordings are what eats up our RAM. If you plan to record guitars/vocals and mix full song recordings in this way then RAM is where you will want to put your money. 4 gigs of RAM should be plenty for most electronic songs, 8 will be great for working with a lot of audio tracks and 16 is overkill for most audio applications (yeah there's always exceptions).


This is a good video, its made with ableton in mind but the principles still apply with any DAW.

[Navron]

AMD used to be top of the line for processors, but (and this is coming from an AMD fanboy), Intel has recently been overpowering AMD in nearly every department, except for the total amount of cores, which many applications aren't even built to utilize yet.

I personally always buy from http://www.ibuypower.com

Have never had any complaints, and they've always built and sent my laptop very fast. Couple that with the fact you can customize your laptop exactly how you want it, you'll quickly see why I prefer them.

Look at this page before you choose a processor: http://www.cpubenchmark.net/laptop.html

The GHz speed and brand do not necessarily mean they will perform better. I opted for a laptop with an i7-3720QM, instead of spending an addition $20 for the i7-3740QM, because the 3720 outperforms the 3740, despite being .1GHz slower.

The only thing you can't customize is the graphics card, which is usually pre-soldered onto the motherboard of laptops. Unfortunately, this means you'll be spending a little extra for a graphics card that isn't really needed for music production.

Anyway, here's a custom rig I built for you on ibuypower:

Case
Battalion 101 CZ-13 15.6" Full HD 1920x1080 Widescreen LED TFT Laptop w/ HDMI Port, Li-Ion Battery, Universal AC Power Adapter - Original Metallic Silver/Black
Processor
Intel® Core™ i7-3720QM Mobile Processor (4x 2.6GHz/6MB L3 Cache)
Memory
8GB [8GB x 1] 1600MHz DDR3 SDRAM [Laptop Memory] - G.SKILL
Video Card
NVIDIA GeForce GT 650M 2GB GDDR3 Video [CZ-13]
Primary Hard Drive
750 GB 7200rpm Serial-ATA Super Slim Laptop Hard Drive
Optical Drive
8x Dual Format DVD±R/±RW + 16x CD-R/RW Combo Drive [CZ-13]
Flash Media Reader / Writer
Built-in 3-in-1 Media Card Reader/Writer [Laptop]
Sound Card
3D Premium Surround Sound Onboard
Network Card
Built-in 10/100/1000 Mbps LAN [Laptop]
Internal Wireless Network Adapter
802.11 b/g/n Wi-Fi + Bluetooth Combo [CZ-13]
Operating System
Microsoft Windows 7 Home Premium + Office Starter 2010 (Includes basic versions of Word and Excel) 64-Bit
USB Ports
Built-in 2x USB 2.0 Ports + 2x USB 3.0 Port [Laptop]
Carrying Case
Free Deluxe Carrying Case
Video Camera
Build-in 1.3 Mega Pixels Digital Web Video Camera
Warranty
Standard Warranty Service - Standard One(1) Year Limited Warranty + Lifetime Technical Support

Price for that one is $1095.

[Matthew N.]

Processor
Intel® Core™

No... just, no. Intels and heavy computing just doesn't add up... and their prices compared to superior AMDs are just ridiculous. Look up on some benchmarks to give you a better clue what CPU to pick, though.

[itroitnyah]

Case
Battalion 101 CZ-13 15.6" Full HD 1920x1080 Widescreen LED TFT Laptop w/ HDMI Port, Li-Ion Battery, Universal AC Power Adapter - Original Metallic Silver/Black
Processor
Intel® Core™ i7-3720QM Mobile Processor (4x 2.6GHz/6MB L3 Cache)
Memory
8GB [8GB x 1] 1600MHz DDR3 SDRAM [Laptop Memory] - G.SKILL
Video Card
NVIDIA GeForce GT 650M 2GB GDDR3 Video [CZ-13]
Primary Hard Drive
750 GB 7200rpm Serial-ATA Super Slim Laptop Hard Drive
Optical Drive
8x Dual Format DVD±R/±RW + 16x CD-R/RW Combo Drive [CZ-13]
Flash Media Reader / Writer
Built-in 3-in-1 Media Card Reader/Writer [Laptop]
Sound Card
3D Premium Surround Sound Onboard
Network Card
Built-in 10/100/1000 Mbps LAN [Laptop]
Internal Wireless Network Adapter
802.11 b/g/n Wi-Fi + Bluetooth Combo [CZ-13]
Operating System
Microsoft Windows 7 Home Premium + Office Starter 2010 (Includes basic versions of Word and Excel) 64-Bit
USB Ports
Built-in 2x USB 2.0 Ports + 2x USB 3.0 Port [Laptop]
Carrying Case
Free Deluxe Carrying Case
Video Camera
Build-in 1.3 Mega Pixels Digital Web Video Camera
Warranty
Standard Warranty Service - Standard One(1) Year Limited Warranty + Lifetime Technical Support

Price for that one is $1095.

Haha, thanks for that, but I won't be spending quite that much on a computer, unless I want to reduce how much I spend on monitors. But I do want to spend that much . I do know an audiophile, though, and he'll be helping me out with choosing a set of monitors and setting up and stuff, so if he suggests a cheaper set of monitors than what I'm looking at right now, then I might spend near $800 on this computer, but $800 is only the amount that I would spend if there's a good reason to (like extra money). But yes, I do believe I will be using the website you linked me. Thanks for that.

[Navron]

Processor
Intel® Core™

No... just, no. Intels and heavy computing just doesn't add up... and their prices compared to superior AMDs are just ridiculous. Look up on some benchmarks to give you a better clue what CPU to pick, though.

You must have forgotten the fact that I'm an AMD fanboy. I was originally planning for my desktop to have an AMD core, until I looked up performance comparisons and realized that the Sandy Bridge line of Intel CPUs were blowing AMD out of the water.

*As of 5th November, 2012*
http://www.cpubenchmark.net/high_end_cpus.html

As you can see, the AMD Opteron 6272 is the highest rated AMD CPU on the chart, with a price tag of $520.

http://www.cpubenchmark.net/cpu.php?cpu ... 72&id=1569

Here's a page showing comparison and where you get the most bang for your buck.

The AMD Opteron 6272 outperforms the Intel i7-3770 with a score of 10,245 to 9,446, which on the main charts, isn't too big of a performance gap.

Now, the AMD Opteron 6272 costs $520, where as the Intel i7-3770 costs $290.

Take into account that the AMD CPU has 16 cores @ a clock speed of 2.1GHz, compared to the i7's 4 cores @ 3.4GHz. Most newer applications nowadays might take advantage of dual core processors, and a few may utilize up to 4 cores.

In conclusion, unless you are utilizing applications that can take advantage of all 16 cores, which as of now are limited to high-performance video rendering applications like Maya, you're better off with a 2 or 4 core processor with a higher clockspeed.

Reading through some threads on multi-threading support for both Cubase 6 and FL 9, it appears that 2 cores being under load is the norm, and occasionally 4 being used, but that's on the higher end of the spectrum.

So if 4 cores appear to be the max that's utilized by music production applications, does it make sense to spend more money on a CPU that will only utilize 4 cores @ 2.1GHz, or less money to utilize 4 cores @ 3.4GHz?

[derpytunes]

I am running an AMD Phenom II X6 1090T (Sadly not available anymore) and 8GB RAM and FL barely puts a dent in its usage. I'd feel pretty safe with your choice there.

[itroitnyah]

Alright, so my dad says that the GHz that a processor gets is split up between the number of processors, so a 3 GHz quad would get .75GHz to each processor that runs a program, so if I had 4 programs open, each program would run at .75 GHz speed, I guess. Now, if I'm just running one program, would more than one processor be running to speed up that program, so then would be the full 3 GHz of processor power going straight into that program? Just wondering so that I know whether it would be more efficient to get a six core processor than a quad core.

[Navron]

Most multicore processors come with power saving/throttling technology, which adjusts the speed of your CPU based on workload.

Your dad is partially correct. You do divide the max. speed of the processor by the number of cores, but by what speed is where he's incorrect.

If you had a 3GHz quad core processor, then your maximum speed is 12GHz, assuming all 4 cores are working under full load, which for most of the time, isn't the case, as most applications will utilize 1, 2, and rarely, 4 cores or more.

That's why it's better to go with something that has few cores, and a higher clock speed.

If the application you're using only utilizes 2 cores, then a 4 core Intel processor @ 3GHz will utilize 6GHz total, whereas a 12 core AMD @ 2GHz will utilize 4GHz total.

[itroitnyah]

Okay, so I checked out ibuypower.com, amazing and stuff. And I also found cyberpowerpc.com, which is also good, and I can buy a similar set up on cyberpower for cheaper than at ibuypower. However, there are incredibly mixed reviews all over the internet for cyberpower. So I'm wondering if anybody has experience with them and would recommend/not recommend them.

From what I've heard in other forums so far that concerns me is:

Parts being broken or not even installed upon arrival

Cyberpower apparently uses refurbished and used parts as well as some new parts

Put in replacement parts if the part you specifically ordered isn't in stock (ex: order a specific motherboard, comes with a difference one than the motherboard you ordered)

When writing a review on the website, it'll automatically put the review at 4-5 stars, no matter how many you give it.

And a variety of stories about constantly shipping the computer back and forth for repairs because of it breaking within a week or sooner.

So I don't think I trust cyberpower pc very much at this point. Which also leads me to believe that ibuypower may also have these problems. So I just want to know which of the two companies is most reliable, or if they're both equally reliable, if I'll be at risk for problems if I order from one or the other, ect.

Or, list some other sites that allow you to custom build computers that you've had luck with and/or would recommend.

[Navron]

I've ordered 2 computers from ibuypower. No problems with any of them for at least 2 years, which for laptops, is pretty average for them to start having issues at that point anyway.

Just ordered a 3rd laptop from ibuypower for my upcoming deployment. Had an issue with my bank saying the shipping address was different than my billing address, but that just ended up being a small hassle. Fax in credit card form, copy of card, photo ID, and tada, order approved, and currently being built.

They keep you updated on what your order status is (collecting parts, building computer, etc). If a part is on backorder, you don't have to worry about them putting in something else in its place. They'll just let you know it's on backorder, and what your new shipping date will be.

[Matthew N.]

Why were you looking at a CPU with 16 cores in the first place? Dude, come on. I think you should know better...

Look into FX-8150 and 8350 - you can safely OC them to over 7 GHz per core, with the record being set by 8150 at 8709 MHz. Those are the true market leaders cost vs. performance-wise.

[Navron]

http://www.hardwaresecrets.com/article/ ... eview/1537

http://www.anandtech.com/bench/Product/434?vs=287

http://amdfx.blogspot.com/2012/04/sneak ... vs-i7.html

http://www.anandtech.com/show/4955/the- ... -tested/11

The reviews don't lie, and for the most part in all of these reviews, an i7 2600k is beating the FX-8150 by a large margin. Here's a quote from the last review by anandtech:

If you're considering buying new, I feel like the 2500K is a better overall part. You get more predictable performance across the board regardless of application type or workload mix, and you do get features like Quick Sync. In many ways, where Bulldozer is a clear win is where AMD has always done well: heavily threaded applications. If you're predominantly running well threaded workloads, Bulldozer will typically give you performance somewhere around or above Intel's 2500K.

As said before, AMD's advantage comes with multi-threaded applications, however its single-threaded application performance is continuously being beat by Intel processors that came out years ago.

Considering most applications today are still single-threaded applications, the advantage AMD has cannot be utilized.

I personally think once most applications take advantage of multi-threading, AMD will be back in action with very competitive processors, however that day isn't today, and whenever that day does come, there's probably going to be a better choice of processor to use.

[itroitnyah]

Why were you looking at a CPU with 16 cores in the first place? Dude, come on. I think you should know better...

Look into FX-8150 and 8350 - you can safely OC them to over 7 GHz per core, with the record being set by 8150 at 8709 MHz. Those are the true market leaders cost vs. performance-wise.

While I would love to get an awesome processor like either of those two, I'm not sure that I would be able to afford it without going over the limit I set myself. I'm trying not to spend more than $1400, and that includes the price of a computer monitor and a set of studio monitors (which I'm going to be spending almost $500 on). I want my computer to be able to easily handle heavy processor loads (good plucks in massive consume 40% processor power on my current computer on "Eco" quality). But at the same time, I also want other components to be good, because I'm going to be doing a bit of gaming in my free time. But, maybe. I'll look into trying to fit the 8350 or 8150 in. Might be a really tight squeeze though.

I'm also assuming you meant 6 core not 16 core in your first sentence there, lol.

[Omegastick]

Itroitnyah, I'm gonna go ahead and agree with Navron on seriously recommending an Intel processor. They are setting new standards consistently at the moment and AMD just aren't keeping up. The main reason people are buying AMD processors are because they are less 'mainstream' but in no way does that make them better. Of course, feel free to ignore me but you'd really be shooting yourself in the foot getting an AMD processor over an Intel one.

[Matthew N.]

Why were you looking at a CPU with 16 cores in the first place? Dude, come on. I think you should know better...

Look into FX-8150 and 8350 - you can safely OC them to over 7 GHz per core, with the record being set by 8150 at 8709 MHz. Those are the true market leaders cost vs. performance-wise.

I'm also assuming you meant 6 core not 16 core in your first sentence there, lol.

I was only quoting. Anyway, I won't force you guys to choose an AMD. I just know that buying a slightly better cooling system and safely OC'ing an AMD to almost twice the power is what I will do once I upgrade my mobo. Whatever your choice will be, I hope you'll enjoy it. Because I tell you - you're right about CPU consumption.

[Navron]

If AMD still ruled the overclocking market, I'd back you up on it 100%. However the new Sandy Bridge and Ivy Bridge processors have shown that Intel has considerably racked up their overclocking ability.

My 2600k comes stock at 3.4GHz, but I'm currently running it at 4.5GHz, which isn't anywhere near the max I could go.

[CommandSpry]

If you want price/performance, AMD FX-8150, or even better the new FX-8350 or FX-8320. Nothing from Intel of that price compares, or even comes close. You'd have to gather at least $50 more to get on the same level even on quad optimized applications, and when 8 core optimized applications start rolling out (like Codemasters already do, releasing 8core maps for their games), even those won't match up.

http://www.cpubenchmark.net/cpu.php?cpu ... re&id=1780

http://www.cpubenchmark.net/cpu.php?cpu ... ore&id=263

Just check the price/performance ratio, Intel never ever gets close.

[itroitnyah]

Update above.

[itroitnyah]

[Itroitnyah] Casts Resurrect! It's super effective! Better to bring this thread back up than to make another one . Oh, and the update at the very top of the thread isn't 100% accurate anymore.

Anyways, so I still haven't gotten a job yet, but I've applied at a few places and am taking lifeguarding lessons to further increase opportunities, but in my freetime I spend more than ample time going over my list of parts I'll be getting and constantly revising and improving. So, as this will be my first time buying and assembling a computer from parts, I would appreciate it if I could my list of parts looked over by somebody who has more experience just to make 100% sure that all parts are compatible with each other. Or, suggestions for improvements for certain parts. But if you're going to suggest improvements for parts, I should warn you that I will not spend over $1000 (and that includes shipping and an 8% tax).

Processor: AMD FX 6300
Motherboard: ASRock
PSU: Corsair CX430
Harddrive: Seagate Barracuda
DVD-ROM Drive: LITE-ON
Audio Interface: M-Audio Fast Track C400
RAM: Corsair Vengeance 8gb
Videocard: GeForce GT 610
Case: NZXT GAMMA
Monitor: 21.5" Dell screen
I have the prices at $838.58 without S&H, shipping costs $42.81, an 8% tax would add $67.09, so the total price comes out at $948.48. Once again, I'm fairly certain that this build will work, but I would like to get the advice of somebody with more experience or advice on what parts would be better instead of another part, since it seems like people are customing building computers that are miles better than my build for just a little bit extra.

[CommandSpry]

That build's cost is very suspicious seeing it's specifications. Not counting the Soundcard, this should not go over 500$ without the monitor.

[itroitnyah]

That build's cost is very suspicious seeing it's specifications. Not counting the Soundcard, this should not go over 500$ without the monitor.

That's what I'm thinking, but once again, I'm new to finding and buying parts to assemble a computer myself. Guess I could use some help with somebody pointing me in the right direction on this

Edit: Alright, so I quickly went through Tigerdirect instead of newegg this time. Not all the parts were on tigerdirect, but I got as close to my current build as possible in quality, and the price is $578.37, not including shipping and handling. >_> Really confused as to what's going on right now. Maybe I'll check my math on the products from newegg... Yup, I guess I did the math wrong or something, but after redoing the math, the total came out to $599.37, not including the AI or monitor. But then I saw that I did my math correctly, because after adding in the price of the AI and monitor, it came out to the original amount I said. I might change some of the parts though after doing the quick browse through Tigerdirect. Better deals on some parts there than Newegg