Could use some quick feedback on whether this build is overpriced
-
Win 10 Pro
i7-5820k
Water cooler
32GB DDR4-2133
NVidia GTX 980
256GB SSD
802.11 a/b/g/n/ac/bluetooth$1585.49 after taxes. It's a prebuilt but supports overclocking and most people w/ a similar model are reporting 4.0-4.5 without touching the internals at all. Because it's a prebuilt, there's no 980 TI option or I'd go w/ that. Wondering how much of a frog I'm eating versus building something similar from scratch, plan on using an 850 Pro in Rapid Mode to get much higher speeds than any M2/PCIe SSDs on the market right now.
Thx.
-
The wireless is for what?
This is clearly for a gaming desktop. Why would you ever want to use WiFi for that. Without the specifics of the motherboard it's be difficult to say for sure.
But it sounds like a pretty large frog.
-
You need even faster SSD performance than PCIe SSDs provide? for gaming?
-
I don't play games, the occasional round of Dota 2 really. It's for web development and 3D modeling. Will be running a full serverware stack ( IIS, MySQL, J2EE app sever, Node ) locally 100% of the time, some VMs off in the background w/ Ubuntu and Windows, and some other random stuff.
Mostly I care about instantaneous responsiveness, which I'm finding I can't achieve w/ my new XPS 15 Skylake 6700HQ, 16GB DDR4, PCIE SSD, 960M laptop, probably because it's thin-ish and self-throttles a lot.
So, no, no gaming. The wifi will be for web browsing and remote desktop but ( didn't mention this, sorry ) is also moot because I don't have a wired option in the office I'm in. Good point though, thanks.
-
@Dashrender said:
You need even faster SSD performance than PCIe SSDs provide? for gaming?
The SSD performance is based on my observations around responsiveness. In the PCIe SSDs I've used, things were fast, but w/ a Samsung in rapid mode they're very, very, very fast feeling. Faster than just PCIe. I presume that's because it's writing most things to RAM before the SSD and moving on.
-
@DustinB3403 said:
The wireless is for what?
This is clearly for a gaming desktop. Why would you ever want to use WiFi for that. Without the specifics of the motherboard it's be difficult to say for sure.
But it sounds like a pretty large frog.
A lot of people, even gamers, live in places where wired isn't an option. I'm one of them. I often get stuck with no possibility of wired connections. This whole month in Texas, for example.
-
Why are you doing this dev locally? Why not get a server? or get some compute power from a provider?
-
@Dashrender said:
Why are you doing this dev locally? Why not get a server? or get some compute power from a provider?
THis is like the tenth thread of people asking him that
-
@creayt you should make a single thread with no question and just an explanation, maybe copied from your other threads, and any time you ask a question just link that as a "this is why" because it will get asked every time.
-
@scottalanmiller said:
@Dashrender said:
Why are you doing this dev locally? Why not get a server? or get some compute power from a provider?
THis is like the tenth thread of people asking him that
Does this imply that this is also the 10th thread without an answer?
-
@scottalanmiller said:
@creayt you should make a single thread with no question and just an explanation, maybe copied from your other threads, and any time you ask a question just link that as a "this is why" because it will get asked every time.
Well, you have to admit that it's a pretty obvious ask considering he said he's using it for Dev purposes.
-
@Dashrender said:
@scottalanmiller said:
@Dashrender said:
Why are you doing this dev locally? Why not get a server? or get some compute power from a provider?
THis is like the tenth thread of people asking him that
Does this imply that this is also the 10th thread without an answer?
He's explained it a few times.
-
@Dashrender said:
@scottalanmiller said:
@creayt you should make a single thread with no question and just an explanation, maybe copied from your other threads, and any time you ask a question just link that as a "this is why" because it will get asked every time.
Well, you have to admit that it's a pretty obvious ask considering he said he's using it for Dev purposes.
Lone dev, focused on performance.
-
@Dashrender said:
Why are you doing this dev locally? Why not get a server? or get some compute power from a provider?
I actually have a handful of servers. Developing locally, at least w/ my workload, ends up being much, much faster because you don't have to wait for what can end up being hundreds of wire requests per second, the semi-trivial latency of each of which, when combined, ends up adding a palpable delay to each code iteration, which over time can end up being minutes to hours but more importantly break your stride. If you save your code and it renders instantly, well that's programmer heaven.
-
@Dashrender said:
@scottalanmiller said:
@Dashrender said:
Why are you doing this dev locally? Why not get a server? or get some compute power from a provider?
THis is like the tenth thread of people asking him that
Does this imply that this is also the 10th thread without an answer?
If it's any consolation, I think most developers develop locally in 2015.
-
But anyway, back to the matter at hand!!!
Does this seem overpriced? I'm ok w/ it being a little bit overpriced, and just sold my previous home-built Xeon GTX 970 workstation last week, so I'm not afraid to build, but overall the prospect of this arriving at my door in a week ready to plug into my new 40" 4k monitor sounds much better than waiting or and assembling a bunch of parts if it's not a total wallet rape.
-
@creayt said:
@Dashrender said:
Why are you doing this dev locally? Why not get a server? or get some compute power from a provider?
I actually have a handful of servers. Developing locally, at least w/ my workload, ends up being much, much faster because you don't have to wait for what can end up being hundreds of http requests per second.
At this point me saying anything feels more like I'm being an ass - but I'll one thing before leaving it alone.
If you're entire loadup/install/whatever you wanna call it, is on the cloud/hosted/etc remote solution, why would those http requests be any slower to that box itself, than it would be on your local machine? of course, the purchased resources might be more expensive in the cloud - and that could be a reason for your request.
This reminds me of the doctor who was demanding sub-second response to every click in his remotely hosted/cloud based EHR, something that just seems unrealistic (unrealistic for his demand - in your single dev setup, with a local install, and huge amounts of cash - totally doable).
-
@Dashrender said:
@creayt said:
@Dashrender said:
Why are you doing this dev locally? Why not get a server? or get some compute power from a provider?
I actually have a handful of servers. Developing locally, at least w/ my workload, ends up being much, much faster because you don't have to wait for what can end up being hundreds of http requests per second.
At this point me saying anything feels more like I'm being an ass - but I'll one thing before leaving it alone.
If you're entire loadup/install/whatever you wanna call it, is on the cloud/hosted/etc remote solution, why would those http requests be any slower to that box itself, than it would be on your local machine? of course, the purchased resources might be more expensive in the cloud - and that could be a reason for your request.
This reminds me of the doctor who was demanding sub-second response to every click in his remotely hosted/cloud based EHR, something that just seems unrealistic (unrealistic for his demand - in your single dev setup, with a local install, and huge amounts of cash - totally doable).
Because when you develop locally they don't even exist, your box feeds your box and doesn't even go out to the web, and the latency is ~0 ms.
-
@Dashrender said:
@creayt said:
@Dashrender said:
Why are you doing this dev locally? Why not get a server? or get some compute power from a provider?
I actually have a handful of servers. Developing locally, at least w/ my workload, ends up being much, much faster because you don't have to wait for what can end up being hundreds of http requests per second.
At this point me saying anything feels more like I'm being an ass - but I'll one thing before leaving it alone.
If you're entire loadup/install/whatever you wanna call it, is on the cloud/hosted/etc remote solution, why would those http requests be any slower to that box itself, than it would be on your local machine? of course, the purchased resources might be more expensive in the cloud - and that could be a reason for your request.
This reminds me of the doctor who was demanding sub-second response to every click in his remotely hosted/cloud based EHR, something that just seems unrealistic (unrealistic for his demand - in your single dev setup, with a local install, and huge amounts of cash - totally doable).
If you're suggesting working directly on the server as a remote workstation w/ remote desktop, when you write and test code and overall navigate an OS very, very fast, the latency of remote desktop is unacceptable. I've tried to work like that at various points, it slows me down. I prototype and test extremely quickly and basically any, even momentary, lag or twitch in my workflow slows me down and makes it feel like working on a mac, which gets my blood pressure up.
-
You lost me? What doesn't exist?
