Your Custom Gaming Rig

[shizzzon 461]

Bro, you make no sense, but do what you gotta do.

LoL

What doesn't make sense?  seriously,

Tell me if you think i made an odd choice on something.

[dem beats 1,223]

What monitors are not supported by GeForce?

Also there isn't a moment when you will max out that much RAM. You could have got more processor with faster productivity anyway, and that would have made up for any theoretical downside to less RAM.

If you got a smoking deal on the AMD cards cool. Unless your dealing with eyefinity, which you are not, the AMD argument is really really weak. One powerful GeForce would trounce it and then if absolutely needed because of your wild amount of displays you want to run you could even get a cheep discrete second card for just drawing desktops.

[dem beats 1,223]

As for the speed of DDR4 RAM 3xxx was available at release and that is the maximum I see from any DDR3.

If you got a deal, cool man. But the argument that your choice was something other than price motivated doesn't add up.

Even think with the CRAZY amount of extra power draw you will still spend nearly the same if not more over a few years.

If you upgrade every year and want initial costs down.... Well then that's that.

[dem beats 1,223]

No matter what you have a beast, just really odd choice of parts considering when you purchased in.

[shizzzon 461]

I wasnt expecting that many posts, lol.

Nvidia does not support Displayport technology but AMD does.

I have 3 DP monitors because i needed small, yet extremely lightweight monitors for monitoring purposes so for my app, thats why AMD was a must.

Now, the ram argument, yes nobody needs over 64gb of ram... but im curious what applications will be presented in the years to come to take advantage of it!

IDo need 64gb of ram though. I typically use about 37gb right now and i cant even get a QVL list of an asus board that accepts more than 32gb of the ddr4 boards which completely trumps another necessity i needed.

[shizzzon 461]

Sorry.. not Displayport.. displaylink

[dem beats 1,223]

None of the monitors you mentioned are smalll though......

Dual 22" 1050p Monitors

Dual 16" 720p Monitors

Single 27" 1440p Monitor (gaming and graphic design)

Single 40-50"(undecided yet) 1080p LED Monitor (for movie playback)

Display link is one of the worst ways to run monitors. You have your reasons, I'm not gonna argue with the fact you made your choices for whatever reason. You could have extracted a lot more performance for less money with some small tweaks is all.

Again your tower is a beast, it's just a really weird, hyper specific, yet not really specialized rig.

[dem beats 1,223]

Can you explain this to me?

IDo need 64gb of ram though. I typically use about 37gb right now and i cant even get a QVL list of an asus board that accepts more than 32gb of the ddr4 boards which completely trumps another necessity i needed.

How can you possibly use that much RAM? Even when testing RAM I cannot get it close to that high. And I am at least 2 generations behind your rig.

The Asus delux supports 64GB of DDR4. The chipset will ultimately allow you to get so much more done with less RAM anyway it won't matter much. For both productivity and games the x99 is so much better, uses less power, and is the same price or cheaper than the previous systems.

[dem beats 1,223]

Not to mention M.2 speeds if you want to really get into needing a quick memory.

[shizzzon 461]

Ramdisks, photoshop, cad design, gaming, many web pages, many monitoring apps.

I use DL for static applications so quality was of no concern.

When i downloaded the asus manual, there was only qvl support for 32gb. That removed that choice from my options since no one could provide a guaranteed package to work.

The 32gb packages for about $1200 and thats only 32gb...

It will take yrs before applications can be generated to take advantage of having 100gb+ memory and if it benefits my interests, then i may upgrade again in a few yrs.

The cost of the mobo and cpu were the same cost basically as what i have now but major limitation to memory in the timeframe i had.

[dem beats 1,223]

I just don't believe it, but you know what you need.

That much RAM on that MOBO will invariably clock the RAM down. so your RAM is probably moving at half the actual speed of DDR4.

ALso you were looking at stupid over the top priced DDR4. I have seen it sub $400 for the 32gb kit. In one google search and not looking any further than the first page I found this.

http://www.newegg.com/Product/Product.aspx?Item=N82E16820231794&nm_mc=KNC-GoogleAdwords&cm_mmc=KNC-GoogleAdwords-_-pla-_-Desktop+Memory-_-N82E16820231794&gclid=Cj0KEQjwnZShBRDfxqzr55rcyMEBEiQA1iRNPxpQwtVLOajimCrUeFU1K06Ka7YQ7JEP7RakV0IovPkaAraU8P8HAQ

That DDR4 will outpace your DDR3 by a bunch.

The new x99 will require less RAM at the end of the day also.

Again, you need to do you, and it will do it's job for years I'm sure. It just doesn't make sense.

You ultimately had to get a second PSU to run it. That costs an extra $100 minimum.

[dem beats 1,223]

Price went up....

http://www.newegg.com/Product/Product.aspx?Item=N82E16820148861

$408.

[dem beats 1,223]

This is the cheepest 64GB set on new egg for DDR3

http://www.newegg.com/Product/Product.aspx?Item=N82E16820231713

$100+ more than the first stuff I put up and $200+ than the cheep stuff.

[shizzzon 461]

There is memory. Then the memory that is compatible with select mobos.. the mobo i looked at.. memory was expensive.

The cheapest solution to 64gb for my mobo for ddr2400 was $760.

Actually 2 psus cost less and more power.

I am running 2 850w for 220 or 240 i paid.

A single 1450w which is smaller was over 400.

I got everything on extreme sells.. thats why i paced this install to wait for the price drops.

Now, i do not know difference between ddr3 and ddr4 on speed alone mhz wise but i do have ddr32400 currently running at 1333.

In about a week or so, ill start ramping it up. To maintain 64gb, the fastest xmp tested profile has been 2133 but ill bypass that and try manually.

[dem beats 1,223]

You cannot ramp it up to that speed. Past 4 chipsets it throttles automatically.

And my point was with a more power efficient system you could have just dealt with one 850W PSU.

WHat you originally said is that the MoBo wasn't capable of 64GB. That is wrong. You also mentioned something about small monitors. 16" isn't small in terms of being so portable and unique that you must use display link, and there are a bajillion other options for monitors(especially low resolution ones) than display link. HDMI is everywhere. Or any of the other USB ways to run a display.

You then said that the RAm was in the thousand+ dollar range. All the RAM I puit up will work with the x99 and was available on launch. The crucial was sent with a ton of the test boards. The lowest cost 64gb option on the chipset you have(and I didn't even confirm it's optimized really) is $200 more expensive, has more issues with clocking up and is at the absolute end of it's life cycle. It's more expensive and slower. You will see a net loss in productivity applications for sure, and absolutely in games. If you got an even fancier set than the Gskill I threw up you were in fact real close to if not over the $1000 range and you will not come close to seeing the clock speed you hoped because the x79 chipset when used in more than 4 slots throttles. Even the mighty Asus board. Maybe someone is milking out a microscopic bit more, but even in the best case scenario it will be running significantly lower clock speeds than in the x99 set up. As in super significantly, as the x99 chipset is so much more efficient.

This isn't opinion, this is measurable fact, and a repeatedly documented problem with the x79 vs the x99.

[dem beats 1,223]

If you said "I just wanted to game in eyefinity/UHD with a budget and I couldn't wait a week or 2" then I would say fine, plausible.

You're talking productivity/monitoring etc etc. Not even running crossfire. Telling me you use 37gb or more of RAM but feel that something double the speed wouldn't have been waiting a week for?

I just don't buy it.

Then again, maybe you found an amazeballs hook up that is selling all this gear for dirtmagert prices, used, whatever. If you paid 15% less than the best prices I can find, then I could understand getting something with so much less efficiency and so much less productivity.

[shizzzon 461]

Im mobile right now so cant respond in great detail but i can ramp the ddr32400 to 2133.

Its already been proven on the board i got.

There was no 64gb qvl for the maximus vi board when i checked the manual...

Im not making it up. It is also fact.

And the ram i was looking at for the maximus vi that was only 32gb or some 16gb modules were over 1000.. again in the manual.

Im not looking at just memory.. im looking at memory that has been tested to work and that is what costs money.

I only buy qvl memory because in the past, people would buy whatever and be incompatible whether it be because of density, single vs double sided, speed, quantity used, etc...

I chose DL monitors because they were cheaper than any other 16" monitor on newegg at the time. Cheapest i think i seen on there was 80 or 90 but they are also heavy too.

I got these for 70 a piece and feel less than 1lb which is a plus in my install.

In the end, im sure x99 is better but not right now. Everything takes time and there is or was no certified 64gb modules for the mobo i researched. Only 32gb max.

Plus, i dont care much about gaming performance. Thats always overrated.

I used to game on a $40 non-fan video card on 1080p settings just fine. It was modded of course because stock would freeze due to the stress but vide9 card prices are all overrated and not needed.

My single card has been proven to do uhd 4k over 30fps on average and most nvidia cards above mine show like performance to the titan so.. not to go off subject but productivity is more important than gaming... and i know gaming is easy to support on pc.

The whole decision of 97 vs 99 was lack of memory support upon purchase for the board i wanted to use if i went to x99.

I dont regret it either.

The best mobos dont come out upon a new line of pc parts. This black edition i got is a new version which is devastating and x79 has been out for a while im sure.

If this were 2016-2017, then im sure x99 would blow me away but now its not catching my attention.

[dem beats 1,223]

The maximus VI is not available for x99. I think maybe the key here is you then researched ineffectively. Don't get all Ass hurt. You have a monster. But every single reason why you chose it is shot down with the fact that the x99 chipset stomps the previous chipset in every measurement other than the side note of not having a 64gb available on launch. This fact will be completely moot as the DDR4 available will smoke the 64GB GDDR3. It's also drastically less expensive.

At time you looked up x99 there were 0 QVL RAM technically. So yeah... That doesn't jive. I watched every video in August and read every preview on the x99 mobo and they all said 64gb compatible.

I don't care what you do, but you have literally shot out misinformation several times.

That's really frustrating. Either you are not paying attention as you type now, or you didn't before. Or both.

[dem beats 1,223]

If you don't care about games, stop bringing it up.

The AMD cards are not as powerful as the GeForce cards. You did it to save money. That's fine. I like money too. However power consumption and the need for more PSU make that moot also.

[shizzzon 461]

I only brought it up to comment on it when you mentioned it.

My monitor shows my cards idle at less than 3w so dont see how it can go any lower without shutting the system down.

I always run excessive psu just in case.

You know, lol, i just went back to asus website and they have a lot more boards now than when they did when i needed pc built. I could have swore the maximus was x99 but oh well.. point is there was only 1... it went for 389 on newegg, it didnt fit what i needed but the black edition did.

I had a timeframe to get it built to continue r&d and some photoshopping.

But... we know i didnt build a slow system. Until this system starts to slow down, ill be happy.

I still have to take pics and such but... still waiting on buying last monitor.

[shizzzon 461]

ok, not mobile.

I'm sure the x99 is better.. why would it come out otherwise?

It was just too premature the time i was doing research on it.

I never presumed x99 would ever be worse than what i have in terms of performance, just lack of it's advertised abilities is lacking currently.

And back about speaking about RAM usage.

I did mention Ramdisks.  That alone can eat however much RAM i desire.

Now, if i didn't use Ramdisks. here is some more info-

I did first use Windows 8.1 but too unstable for doing "experimental" things and the lack of driver support for all this new hardware eventually cause a total windows crash in which even the OS couldnt recover itself.  

Since it was still a fresh install, i decided to put win7 on it and is much more stable.

Back when win8.1 was installed, it was using 6.7gb on startup with NO security installed.

Now since i've had win7 installed for a while, i am currently running 10.2GB of RAM.

All i'm doing is surfing some sites, running a small game, other monitors and news feeds.

There are over 110 active processes running and a lot of this memory is allocated for other things as well even though it doesn't use it.

IE- the system has allocated 32GB of ram for the video cards.  But, since i'll never go over the 3GB of GDDR, that allocation will never actually be used.

It's weird how it's worded in Windows..  It's allocated but not lost or used..

 

[dem beats 1,223]

7.1 uses way more RAM. Like 30% more.

What do you use RAMDisk for? it's crazy unstable for most things. Unless your using a different name. If your talking about AMD RAMDisk, it's a gaming thing..... And once again way faster RAM would blow it away. DDR4 also has error detection and correction that isn't around in DDR3. This is especially useful in both uses of RAMDisk. It would massively increase your stability, speed, and protection.

As I said, you researched poorly at the end then. Every Asus card supports everything you mentioned and has from the first info release.

The AMD cards use almost nothing in idle. The 3 watts is about 300% of what the GeForce cards would, but it's a moot point. If you are driving displays with them, they are in use, and at that point they will use TDP. They don't throttle and use less magically. They are running or they aren't. They will draw power from the wall if they are drawing pixels. You keep talking about "experimental" things and your "install".

If those 2 vague things needed you to build the machine you did, then awesome. I have no problem with any of that. However every detail of the x99 platform you talked about was incorrect. You researched poorly, or you made a decision based on your esoteric and odd needs.

You asked me to critique. I did. Without knowing you're classified experimental stuff it doesn't matter at this point.

You keep using the wrong name for parts and badly misquoting information. Maybe the info you read was wrong.... But you are literally getting the name of the parts wrong. That's like saying my Fi BTL has Fi Q capacities.

Just be more careful.

[dem beats 1,223]

I got around to upgrading... Rocking a 5960x on a rampage MoBo crucial DDR4 and a pair of 980msi cards.

I wanted EVGA but the MSI were dirt cheep and I have the ability to upgrade whenever I want.

I'm finally free from the problems I had pushing those monitors

Sweetness.

[coobies5 43]

Upgrade my system please!

I may try out the ati cards next go around, I've always had nvidia and never tried out ati.....I will however stick to my intel processors....not a amd fan at all

[OhHotDayum 1]

Honestly, it wouldn't hurt any of you to download a bit more ram...