Jump to content
Lt DeFault

New Gaming Rig - Thoughts?

Recommended Posts

My wife wants a new gaming rig to replace the one she currently has: an HP Blackbird. The Blackbird is about 10 years old now and - although we've been upgrading the graphics cards, RAM and power supply - it's starting to really show its age. So, I did some research and I'm thinking of pulling the trigger on an MSI Trident X 9th. Here's the basic rundown:

 

  • 3.6 GHz Intel Core i9-9900K Eight-Core
  • Z370I Gaming Pro Carbon AC Mini ITX Motherboard
  • 32GB DDR4 | 512GB NVMe SSD + 2TB HDD
  • NVIDIA GeForce RTX 2080 Ti (11GB GDDR6)
  • 650W 80 Plus Gold Certified PSU
  • USB 3.1 Type-A & Type-C | HDMI 1.4| DisplayPort 1.2
  • Wi-Fi 5 (802.11ac) | Bluetooth 5.0
  • Windows 10 Pro (64-Bit)

 

The only downside I can see right now is that the case is kind of small (15.6 x 15.1 x 5.1 inches [129.7 x 382.7 x 396.4mm]) and the hardware seems crammed into it with little extra space - potentially making future upgrades difficult if not impossible. (I'm thinking about graphics card replacement, mostly. I could put the 1200W power supply I have outside the case if I needed to.) I'm not fond of Windows 10, but it's her computer, so I guess that doesn't matter much. And with 10 Pro the RAM limit is a whopping 2TB!

 

So, what do you guys think? Is it worth the $3,000 asking price? Are there any other rigs you would buy instead of this one? NB: Her budget is $3,000, so this [just] fits the bill. She might be convinced to spend a little more, if there's good reason to. It's her money, but it still makes me nervous spending that much. I know a little bit about computers, but I'm no guru.

 

Any input would be greatly appreciated, thanks!

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I'd ensure you have GB Ethernet on board too.

 

WiFi is good for convenience, but relatively speaking terrible for network performance.

 

Why invest in a good Internet connection (say 100 / 20) only to compromise on the last few metres to the machine itself.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

This may or may not matter to yourself or your spouse but you may want to consider VR. I’m not certain on the Nvidia card that your specs are listing. 

 

Although ProPE doesn’t support VR, there are other softwares that do. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
22 minutes ago, CalAB said:

This may or may not matter to yourself or your spouse but you may want to consider VR. I’m not certain on the Nvidia card that your specs are listing. 

 

Although ProPE doesn’t support VR, there are other softwares that do. 

What? There is other software the SB pro PE...nonsense ;-)

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
33 minutes ago, Grenny said:

What? There is other software the SB pro PE...nonsense ;-)

+! 

Umm may be DCS ?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
3 hours ago, CalAB said:

 you may want to consider VR. I’m not certain on the Nvidia card that your specs are listing.

The RTX 2080 Ti is already overkill for VR sets.

 

But, if you have the money, I'm sure it'll be a damn fine gaming machine for quite a while.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

That's one thing we're concerned about: longevity. We'd like it to be as "future proof" as possible. And a 4K monitor isn't out of the question. I doubt we'll be doing any VR, though ... but who knows?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
41 minutes ago, Lt DeFault said:

 We'd like it to be as "future proof" as possible.

cannot be done, you lose that game every time chasing a phantom. 'the future' is not a perceptible experience, there is only now- you could be enjoying your computer if you bought it now, or not enjoying it now.

 

if the idea is to stretch your budget as far as possible into the future with buying the most expensive you could afford now, you could have bought something cheaper and invested the difference and then you would probably have more money to show for it over the long run (then eventaully upgrade again later).

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

That's something to think about, thanks.

 

More info: WRT her "budget", that's just how much she is willing to pay right now, we're not quite maxing out. And we do have some investments.

 

We know we will have to upgrade at some point if we want this PC to last as long as the previous one. Our line of thinking is that if we go for some "overkill" now, we won't have to upgrade as soon. It seemed to work last time. Does that make sense? Or do you think the technology (hardware and software) is still advancing at such a rate that it won't make that much of a difference?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

i think the difficult matter is i could tell you how i would do it based on how i primarily use my computer, but i don't really know what you want to do with yours

 

the only other reason we need to upgrade to run spreadsheets and word processors is because microsoft is imposing compatibility problems with new operating systems that they roll out, so let's get down to brass tacks- besides that you are upgrading to play computer games. my nine year old computer was top of the line offered as a dell gaming machine in 2010, notwithstanding the fact it was a single core cpu, didn't have dual or quadruple graphics cards, and it still works quite well for my purposes (i don't own dcs or arma 3, if those are meaningful indicators).

 

the question is what type of performance do you intend to get out of what specific games you think you'll be playing- maybe specifically ask others what their machines subjectively feel like with arma 3 or dcs loaded as a comparison and then go from there.

Edited by Captain_Colossus

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Well the GTX for example - buying it banks on the idea that the real-time raytracing will actually take off and be one of the next big "things" in gaming. Some games will probably go fo it, but NVidia has also shown that they can ruin a great concept like PhysX by reducing it to a mere visual effect. Likewise, the i9 processor is about the most godawful expensive CPU for consumers that is floating around. It offers some extra performance in the single thread department but whether that's worth the significantly higher price is a question that everybody has to answer for himself; personally, I remain somewhat skeptical on the following grounds:

  • Single thread performance has largely tapered off over the past five if not ten years. The times where significant raises in CPU clock were following Moore's law are long over, and they won't be coming back anytime soon (if ever), simply because we're approaching the limitations of the laws of physics themselves.
  • Therefore, future gains in CPU performance can only be found in parallelization. It is true that many programmers still haven't well adapted to multithreaded programming; especially rewriting legacy code to utilize multi-core CPUs is quite a task (believe me). But even if software is somewhat slow to pick up this trend, it is unavoidable in the field of high performance computing (and that's what top of the line computer games and simulations are)
  • Therefore, programmers don't really have much of a choice.
  • Intel has held back larger numbers of cores in their CPUs simply because they could, and to protect the pricing of their server CPUs. As soon as AMD came around the corner with Threadrippers' 16 cores, all of a sudden Intel releases the i9. They could have done that years ago, but nobody threatened their monopoly, so why would they? "You don't need more than four cores (plus hyperthreading)", they said.

While I agree that "futureproofing" a PC is an elusive goal, I'd still go for a 12 or 16 core CPU that is a bit slower in single thread performance these days but costs half the money and offers more PCI-E lanes for I/O for much less money than the i9. But that's just my personal point of view. Another factor to consider is power consumption and cooling. Raw computing power is less appealing it if comes with the howling of a battery of fans at max speed. A $2,000 gaming computer may only last for the next six years rather than the eight years that you might squeeze from the $3,000 machine but the saved $1,000 will buy you more computing power in six years than they do today.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Well, we finally pulled the trigger on this rig. I think the only differences from the specs I listed in the first post is that this build has:

  • 1TB Samsung 970 EVO Plus SSD
  • NVIDIA GeForce RTX 2080 VENTUS OC 8GB GDDR6
  • Windows 10 Home (64-bit)

I will probably end up taking over the old HP Blackbird and installing SB on that. But I will likely also install SB on the MSI for grins.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Join the conversation

You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.

Guest
Reply to this topic...

×   Pasted as rich text.   Paste as plain text instead

  Only 75 emoji are allowed.

×   Your link has been automatically embedded.   Display as a link instead

×   Your previous content has been restored.   Clear editor

×   You cannot paste images directly. Upload or insert images from URL.


×
×
  • Create New...