New Posts  All Forums:

Posts by 996gt2

According to Puget's post, the single rice-sized dot in the middle did not lead to even coverage, which may be why it didn't perform as well as the X method: Dot in the middle: X-shape: Overall performance:
http://www.pugetsystems.com/labs/articles/Thermal-Paste-Application-Techniques-170/ Not sure if this has been posted, but their conclusion was that the "X-shape" gave the best results. Have you guys found this to be true in your experience?
Techpowerup's heatsink reviews are terribly inconsistent. For example, they have the Phanteks PH-TC12DX only 2 degrees behind the PH-TC14PE. Take a look at the 2 coolers and make your own conclusions about the accuracy of TPU's testing: Here's the TC14PE, a huge dual-tower cooler with 140mm fans. Here's the TC12DX, which only has 1 tower, and uses 120mm fans vs. 140mm on the TC14PE.
In.
The Fire strike list I posted above only includes systems with a single GPU. It's pretty obvious that no one building a high-end multi GPU rig is going to go with an AMD CPU unless they really want to be different and are willing to sacrifice performance to be different.However, you can see that even with single GPUs, there are no AMD systems on that Fire strike top scores list.That means the AMD CPU is the bottleneck. If it wasn't, you would see at least one or two AMD...
Between Asus and Gigabyte I'd go with Asus. I have yet to have a problem with an Asus mobo, and their customer support has been great for the 2 GPUs that I've had to RMA through them.The 2 Gigabyte boards I've had both had issues. The P67 board I had suffered from voltage instability (limiting my OC), and the older P35 board I had got bricked on a BIOS update and needed RMA. Not sure if their RMA process is better now, but back then it took 3 weeks to get a replacement...
In for 4/16
OP said in the first post that he was planning on going to Microcenter anyway, so that means he has one near him.
There's nothing from AMD that can match a 4770K, much less an overclocked 4770K. That's the blunt truth. The FX-9590 is no different from an FX-8320 with a very high factory overclock. It does manage to get close to a stock 4770K due to the high factory OC, but you should be aware that it will have almost no overclocking headroom since it's already running at near-max clocks out of the box. If you're okay with that, go for it. Otherwise, your money would be better...
I'd pay more for Asus's better reliability, but that's just me. I've had issues with MSI and Gigabyte boards in the past, but not an Asus board so far. Plus, their customer support has been pretty good in my own experience, though I'm sure others may disagree.AsRock has great budget offerings, but their mixed track record of reliability makes me wary about getting a decently expensive AsRock board...
New Posts  All Forums: