Sometimes work pays :-) (New pc) Are these specs ok?

[Goair-18 3]

Hey guys, so last week only 9 years after i started working in the company i am in now in the uk iv forund out they have a pc scheme to allow employees to buy a new compter My Budget was £2000, So the company my work uses was pc world so i headed up there today and took alook. I normaly build my own but thought id take this offer up. After looking around the best spec they had in was a HP with 23inch hd monitor for £1099. The spec i7-2600k 3.4 with 8meg cache8 gig ram2TB HDD1 GB NVida GT530 I know these are ok specs just wanted to know if anyone else has simlar specs. The reason for my upgrade was my dual core built a year ago is ok but after installing earth simulations Gernsey im only getting 4.5 fps Thanks guys Danny.

[MrKen 3]

Get a gtx560ti or gtx570. The gt series isn't going to cut it, needs to be a gtx.Be sure to get 64-bit os as well

[Guest 747-fan]

Get a good cooler like the noctua nh-d14 as well, and you'll be able to overclock it to heck and back. But since budget's a factor, you can run it with the boxed cooler for a while and then upgrade if it still doesn't do the job. The GTX560Ti is great value.

[MrKen 3]

Actually, you could build a pc yourself cheaper. It isn't difficult at all

[Tabs 2,789]

Consider an i5 2500K instead of the i7 2600K and put the extra $100 from that into a better GPU - GTX 560 Ti or 570 as others said.

[b0gey_dead_six 11]

Is the offer only for prebuilt computers? If you get a computer from HP, Dell, etc.. it limits you in terms of overclockability, etc since the motherboards from them are most likely locked.

[Lukas_Mathijsen 41]

@David: also you will waaaay overpay for what you would else pay if you build it yourself.

[MrKen 3]

Hey Ryan i thought the i7 was better than the i5?? Also then man at pc world was telling me its better to buy pre built as it would be cheaper, it already has WIN7 premium 64bit installled. Its too late to change my mind now as the paper work has already gone up to HQ. I I can always take the CPU out and buy a new board, or just put the tower on ebay and build one myself!!! My pc im using now is self built, i only built it last year it was ok then, but now better aircraft and scenerys are coming out and my pc is struggling to keep up.

The 2600k is better for some tasks because of the hyperthreading, but since FSX can't take advantage of that the 2500k performs just as well. Since you have the 2600k already though, I'd just stick with it. If the stock motherboard won't let you overclock you can pick up a good P67 or Z68 board for $150USD. A good cooler is about half that much or less.

[Chock 3,554]

That's not a bad computer, and to be honest, I'd disregard what people are saying about building one the same for a lot less, because you won't, you'd pay pretty close to that money for the components found in that HP in the UK. Cheapest place in the UK for components is usually scan computers, and if you check there, an i7 is 230 quid, a suitable mobo 80 quid, the RAM another 60, the case another 100, the PSU another 50, GPU 150, the OS another 80, the monitor might be 200 quid or so, keyboard and mouse another 50, hard drive another 100, optical drive another 50 and your time getting it all together another 50. Add all that up and see what you total at, and that doesn't include the cost of other bits such as DV out cards, frontal USB and sound cards, modem connector, remote control unit etc, all of which that has. You can get cheaper components and bring that price down of course, but they are exactly that, cheaper, i.e. they'd fry sooner and the specs are invariably less even if they keep on going, whereas you know HP have picked components that work well together, which is why I've got two HP PCs, a laptop and a desktop. It is possible to build computers for less, but what you're getting there is about on the money to be honest and good to go right from the off with no need to build it and a three year warranty to boot, and it'll run FSX well. It's a good choice you've made. Al

[antic81 2]

Here you go mate - pre-built and under £2000. Great site, I have used them many times before. http://www.overclockers.co.uk/showproduct.php?prodid=FS-174-OE Also I make it a habit never to listen to anybody from PC World! Cheers, Anthony

[b0gey_dead_six 11]

That's not a bad computer, and to be honest, I'd disregard what people are saying about building one the same for a lot less, because you won't, you'd pay pretty close to that money for the components found in that HP in the UK. Cheapest place in the UK for components is usually scan computers, and if you check there, an i7 is 230 quid, a suitable mobo 80 quid, the RAM another 60, the case another 100, the PSU another 50, GPU 150, the OS another 80, the monitor might be 200 quid or so, keyboard and mouse another 50, hard drive another 100, optical drive another 50 and your time getting it all together another 50. Add all that up and see what you total at, and that doesn't include the cost of other bits such as DV out cards, frontal USB and sound cards, modem connector, remote control unit etc, all of which that has. You can get cheaper components and bring that price down of course, but they are exactly that, cheaper, i.e. they'd fry sooner and the specs are invariably less even if they keep on going, whereas you know HP have picked components that work well together, which is why I've got two HP PCs, a laptop and a desktop. It is possible to build computers for less, but what you're getting there is about on the money to be honest and good to go right from the off with no need to build it and a three year warranty to boot, and it'll run FSX well. It's a good choice you've made. Al

...... Each part you buy comes with a warranty. HP, Dell, etc.. use cheap parts, your point? They use terrible RAM with high latency, their own brand motherboards that have limited options, and an extremely low-performance video card.. and you want to spend that much money?

[Sumits81 9]

Consider an i5 2500K instead of the i7 2600K and put the extra $100 from that into a better GPU - GTX 560 Ti or 570 as others said.

Hi Ryan,I too have been thinking about this and since i play other games too, would it not make sense to future proof with the 2600k?Thanks

[AAfan 49]

Consider an i5 2500K instead of the i7 2600K and put the extra $100 from that into a better GPU - GTX 560 Ti or 570 as others said.

Ryan, what about Flight that is around the corner, I bet it will be able to handle the goodies of the 2600K

[NGX 1]

Ivy Bridge will be released most likely before Flight.

[AAfan 49]

Ivy Bridge will be released most likely before Flight.

That doesn't mean Sandy Bridge will be left out

[NGX 1]

That doesn't mean Sandy Bridge will be left out

Of course not. But its microsoft. Flight (most likely) won't have hyperthreading support, meaning the 2500K will be just as good as the 2600K for it

[Cuddly1956 1]

Very recently built myself one Danny...Asus p8p67 deluxe motherboard, 2500k cpu, 550ti gpu, 500Gb hybrid drive, 128Gb ssd, case and 650w psu, dvd drive, 8Gb memory (2x4Gb), wireless card and H60 cooler - £850 the lot.Obviously you'd need to add Win7 64bit and a monitor if needed but that, at most, would add maybe £200.Even at stock it outperforms my i7 860 pc with 260+ fps using the default flight on unlimited (fsx on ssd is a real joy to load).Yet to overclock it yet as I like to run it for a bit to make sure the build is stable but will go to at least 4Ghz later.John Ellison

[AAfan 49]

Of course not. But its microsoft. Flight (most likely) won't have hyperthreading support, meaning the 2500K will be just as good as the 2600K for it

Why would Microsoft not add it?

[MrKen 3]

I really doubt any simulator could effectively use 8 threads. All the processes are too interdependent, which kills the efficiency of hyperthreading (or multi-core in general).

[Chock 3,554]

Hey Alan thats what i thought. I forgot to add the board has built in wireless and also a blue-ray player and dvd rewriter. Cant wait to test it out friday when i pick it up. Just gotta re-install fsx amongst a hell of alot more add-ons . Im just thinking now how far i can push the sliders up!! . Will i have any trouble installing my ngx onto it as it will be a different computer???

You can install the NGX just fine on your new computer, it'll just ask you to activate it again, although you probably should delete it off your old one to be entirely kosher. You computer is very similar to an HP desktop which I have, although I changed the PSU from the stock HP one and slung an ATI card in it. As some have noted, it is true that the motherboard and RAM is probably not the best you could get in terms of playing around, but to be honest you could swap both those out for less than 150 quid at some point if you really felt the need to overclock. In any case the later generation Sandy Bridge i7s don't really need to be overclocked to get decent performance out of FSX, so it is something of a moot point, at least until you stick so many add-ons in FSX that you feel you do need to overclock, and it would have to be a lot of things you'd have added to make that a desperate need. The proof of the pudding will be in the eating, and I can confidently predict that with no changes whatsoever, the computer you have bought will run FSX at a level that you will be more than happy with. With a similar computer to yours, as mine is, I get about 60 fps average in the NGX with all the sliders pretty much maxed out (airliners on 50 percent being about the only one not over all the way). On stock FSX aircraft, it's up near the 100 mark for FPS, which is getting close to what FS9 will do with a payware airliner: Al

[pride545 30]

Of course not. But its microsoft. Flight (most likely) won't have hyperthreading support, meaning the 2500K will be just as good as the 2600K for it

How in the world do you think you know what Flight will or will not have?? No-one knows anything anout it!!!

[MrKen 3]

How in the world do you think you know what Flight will or will not have?? No-one knows anything anout it!!!

1) that was a supposition, she didn't state it as fact.2) multithreading isn't as simple as flipping an "enable" switch. The majority of applications can't effectively use 8 threads because the processes are too interdependent. One is always waiting on another to finish before it can proceed.Edit: there would be an advantage, but nowhere near what people think/expect. Very few types of programs out there could actually keep 8 cores busy.

[Paul_Smith 91]

Also then man at pc world was telling me its better to ...

If the man at PC world knew anything about computers, he wouldn't still be working at PC world. :)

[Chock 3,554]

If the man at PC world knew anything about computers, he wouldn't still be working at PC world. :)

Now that, I certainly do agree with Al