The Gaming PC I just purchased, a big upgrade from my old PC? (Specs inside)

Poor2More

Poor2More

CAGiversary!
Feedback
7 (100%)
I wanted an upgrade, because I was gaming on a Alienware M11x Laptop, and yes it was fairly good, but always stuck playing MMO's at 25-30 FPS w/Med Settings at 1920x1080.

Here is my Alienware M11xR2 Laptop (Purchased new April 2011)

i5-520UM 1.07 GHz
8 GB Ram
Geforce GT 335m
320 gb Hard Drive


Here is the one I just Purchased

Alienware Aurora R3 Desktop (w/ Liquid Cooling)
1 TB SATA II Hard Drive (7200RPM)
i7-2600k (8MB Cache, 3.4 GHz) Factory OverClocked @4.1 GHZ
Geforce GT 545 1GB GDDR5
8 GB DDR3 1333MHz
CPU Liquid Cooling

Pleas no discussions about Alienware are over priced (which they may be) but I got a pretty damn good deal on the Aurora, I mainly wanted a Alienware Desktop because of how easy it is to upgrade including Videocard. My Alienware Laptop could not be upgraded at all except Harddrive, so I wanted a new gaming machine.
 
Last edited by a moderator:
Guess it depends on your definition of big. Is the processor a leap - yes. Same thing with graphics processor. I will hazard a guess that you went from a 5400rpm HD to that one - so you will notice it. So depending on the games I guess it could be. What are you able to play your games at now? I assume at 1900 x 1080 at High / Very High or with x4-x8 AA turned on?
 
I thought I got a great deal on The Alienware Aurora R3 Desktop, I purchased it on Dell outlet, It's a Factory Certified Refurbish computer which was explained to me in great detail that it comes with a full original 1 year warrenty as their new computers do, It's been taken apart piece by piece and cleaned and also brand new thermal paste applied.

Dell outlet was running a special yesterday, All Alienware Aurora desktop are 35% off, here is the pricing.

Alien Aurora R3
Retail $2000
Outlet Certified Refurbish Price $1,189
After promotion/discount my total is $650 shipped (I should be able to unload my Alienware M11x laptop for $400)

Dell has a Giftcard promotion, when you purchase $500 in a Dell GC, they give you an extra $90 for free. I also signed up for Free Dell Loyal program which gives you an extra 10% back in rebate ($75 back in this case)
 
[quote name='Poor2More']

Pleas no discussions about Alienware are over priced (which they may be) but I got a pretty damn good deal on the Aurora, I mainly wanted a Alienware Desktop because of how easy it is to upgrade including Videocard. My Alienware Laptop could not be upgraded at all except Hard drive, so I wanted a new gaming machine.[/QUOTE]
Alienware M11X * R2 generally packed with 4GB(removable ) DDR3 Memory which can be upgraded up to 16 GB for better gaming better effect. You can search for it in memorystock.com. For upgrading you have to open from backwards where after opening if you want to upgrade memory then gently pull back the retention clips and then push them backwards and the easily change it.
You also can upgrade 250GB disk to the larger capacities and you need to 3 screws and then change it. During changing you need to concern that the SATA connector is connected with the socket.
For changing battery you just need to unscrew the aside 2 screws which hold the battery.
You can change Wi-Fi card and WWAN cards at second but double slot. And those you will find at Mini-PCIe slots.

 
[quote name='marcorubio']
Alienware M11X * R2 generally packed with 4GB(removable ) DDR3 Memory which can be upgraded up to 16 GB for better gaming better effect. You can search for it in memorystock.com. For upgrading you have to open from backwards where after opening if you want to upgrade memory then gently pull back the retention clips and then push them backwards and the easily change it.
You also can upgrade 250GB disk to the larger capacities and you need to 3 screws and then change it. During changing you need to concern that the SATA connector is connected with the socket.
For changing battery you just need to unscrew the aside 2 screws which hold the battery.
You can change Wi-Fi card and WWAN cards at second but double slot. And those you will find at Mini-PCIe slots.

[/QUOTE]

Yes but I was mainly of speaking of items that effect performance in games such as CPU and GPU.

Also Ram is not as important as it once was, most MMO's rely heavy on your CPU
 
[quote name='jmbreci']Guess it depends on your definition of big. Is the processor a leap - yes. Same thing with graphics processor. I will hazard a guess that you went from a 5400rpm HD to that one - so you will notice it. So depending on the games I guess it could be. What are you able to play your games at now? I assume at 1900 x 1080 at High / Very High or with x4-x8 AA turned on?[/QUOTE]
The 320GB drives on the mx11's were 7200... They are considered ultra mobile gaming laptops in a compact chassis so they do sacrifice a bit of performance for their unique abilities, while blowing anything else in the 11-12" laptop market.

I think OP got a really good deal on his system. Only thing he should do is upgrade the GPU down the road like he said he wanted to do.
 
Nice, just found out Dell upgraded my processor

its the i7-2600k (not i7-2600 like originaly thought) and They overclocked it also @4.1 GHz lvl 1 Overclock, They said their is an option to do level 2 overclock @4.4 GHz, but thats up to the user to do it theirself.

Also people noted you can Overclock the K series processor to 5.0 GHz, lol I think I will pass on that, because the i7-2600k is pretty much overkill for gaming, so doubt I would need to do that for the next few years.
 
[quote name='dustdust']Your CPU is very good..however, that GPU is not particularly powerful[/QUOTE]

This.

I wouldn't upgrade your GPU just yet though. Wait for the next generation of GPU hardware to come out, then get the card approprate for your budget.
 
So I had considered liquid cooling when I built my rig, but it seemed kinda confusing and more expensive than a push/pull air system. Plus what happens if it leaks or something?
 
[quote name='MrshllJcb']So I had considered liquid cooling when I built my rig, but it seemed kinda confusing and more expensive than a push/pull air system. Plus what happens if it leaks or something?[/QUOTE]
Just grab a simple all-in-one liquid cooler like that from Corsair. Simple, easy to install, and mounts pretty much the same as any air cooler setup minus the need to mount the radiator. Not a lot of fuss or mess compared to making your own custom liquid cooling rig.
 
[quote name='JasonTerminator']This.

I wouldn't upgrade your GPU just yet though. Wait for the next generation of GPU hardware to come out, then get the card approprate for your budget.[/QUOTE]

Yea I might do just that and wait. My Aurora won't be delivered till Jan 4, so I might be jumping gun thinking about upgrading GPU. The only 2 PC games I play currently are The Secret World and Guild Wars 2, so hopefully I can play them on HIGH at around 40 FPS, then I will be more then satisfied.
 
I've never felt the need to do liquid cooling. Then again, I've never felt the urge to go to extreme overclocking either. If you are not going to the extreme end of overclocking I have always felt that they are a waste of money the could be used to upgrade to either a higher CPU or GPU or a better monitor.

If you are not doing the extreme, unless you are running it in a 80+ degree area, it is a waste. It will not last any longer than a CPU without one.
 
[quote name='jmbreci']If you are not doing the extreme, unless you are running it in a 80+ degree area, it is a waste. It will not last any longer than a CPU without one.[/QUOTE]
Actually, there's a direct correlation to cpu temperature and component longevity. Lowering operating temperatures and stresses will lead to a lower probability of a component failure; it really depends on if you plan on operating the cpu for 3-5 years, 5-10 years or even longer. Temperature is one part that plays a significant role in cpu degradation.

The Tcase, aka thermal limit, of the 2600k cpu package is 72.6°C; in realistic terms, the die should handle 100°C within standard operating specs. A stock intel 2600k using the stock intel cooler shouldn't see anything higher than 70-75C to the cores in a normal indoor environment.

There's also still some expensive air cpu coolers that will actually still out perform entry level all-in-one liquid coolers for the same price, but the Corsair H60 that was on sale during cyber monday for $40 on newegg was a slickdeal. Don't need to spend $$$ that most people believe to get into the cpu liquid cooling game these days. Even custom systems could be had for under $100 if you shop smartly (and have a microcenter nearby for hugely discounted/clearance items).
 
Hmm Newegg has the GTX 660 on sale for $199+$20 rebate= $179, plus V.Me (Visa Paypal type service) gives you $20 off any order $199.99 and up.

So basically $159 for GTX 660+ Free Assasins Creed 3

is it worth upgrading from GT 545 to GTX 660

GT 545 benchmark
http://www.videocardbenchmark.net/gpu.php?gpu=GeForce+GT+545


GTX 660 benchmarks
http://www.videocardbenchmark.net/gpu.php?gpu=GeForce+GTX+660

Not sure how G3D mark scores relate to gaming performance (sorta new to GPU type lingo)
But essentially a 3000 mark difference, worth the upgrade or will I not really notice the bump in gaming performance?

Thanks
 
Don't use Videocardbenchmark.net, its a site that paper benchmarks with very little transparency; the tests they do have, you don't know anything about the testing conditions, test bed, etc... or even how well any of the synthetic tests translates into real world performance. As my professor would say, "testing without the same conditions is testing a failed experiment", leads to wild correlation of misappropriated data without understanding the original hypothesis.

Use independent websites that actually do proper benchmarks in a wide variety of tests and games. Sites like anandtech.com, tomshardware.com, guru3d.com, and like 10 others.

The GT 545 uses a trimmed down version of the GF116 core, the same GPU in the GTX 550 ti. Nvidia, in all of their crazy marketing/re-branding schemes, has re-purposed the GT 545 as the GT 640. Don't be fooled, its no where near the GTX 650 or 660 area in terms of power. The 660 is roughly 3-4x (or more) in practically every modern game; anandtech's simple benchmark comparison should be taken with a grain of salt, but its very close and they try to keep the same test bed and conditions for each year.

You can read each review individual and compare yourself.
Just do note, most review sites tend to test the "best case scenario" with using the top of the line test bed/PC. Tom's Hardware uses a $1000 i7 3960k and a $400 motherboard with other top of the line parts, so you do have to extrapolate of how well the same cards could perform given your own specs and conditions.
 
[quote name='52club']I always like to use this:

http://www.tomshardware.com/reviews/gaming-graphics-card-review,3107-7.html

You'll see the 545 is several tiers below the 660. The one thing I haven't seen brought up yet is what type of power supply you have. Depending on which direction you go and if Alienware went cheap on this component it might also need to be upgraded.[/QUOTE]

875w power supply, also seen on several fourms with the Aurora R3 and same power supply, running dual GTX 660 with no problems at all.
 
[quote name='52club']I always like to use this:

http://www.tomshardware.com/reviews/gaming-graphics-card-review,3107-7.html

You'll see the 545 is several tiers below the 660. The one thing I haven't seen brought up yet is what type of power supply you have. Depending on which direction you go and if Alienware went cheap on this component it might also need to be upgraded.[/QUOTE]
It was brought up like 6 posts before and anyone who knows anything about alienware would have known that they only use their unique 525 or 875 psu. Even the 525 is more than enough to support a GTX 660 and still have OC headroom for the cpu.
 
[quote name='JBaz']It was brought up like 6 posts before and anyone who knows anything about alienware would have known that they only use their unique 525 or 875 psu. Even the 525 is more than enough to support a GTX 660 and still have OC headroom for the cpu.[/QUOTE]

Thank you so much for your insight in this thread and helping me. I went ahead and picked up the GTX 660, that should last me for a while I would hope : )
 
[quote name='JBaz']so all said and done, how much after taxes is this new system with the 660? I think you got a killer deal.[/QUOTE]

$850/after upgrading to GTX 660 ;)
 
Hmm thinking of upgrading Ram now. It has 8 gb 1333mhz (4gbx2). I see now that Aurora R3 supports 2133mhz ram after a bio update. If I go from my 8 gb 1333mhz to 8gb 2133mhz, will it be significant bump in performance (particularly gaming)? Am I better off just to upgrade to 16gb ram (4gbx4 @ 1333mhz)

If so what's the most dependable ram on the market? Corsair?Rip Jaw? Or what other company?

If you recommend a particular ram pleas post link.
 
Stick with the ram you have now. It really makes very little difference in games, may see 1-5% overall performance boost in your system, but expect maybe 1-3fps higher with just a ram bump. That's well within the % of error when running benchmarks. For gaming, anything faster than 1600 is nothing more than e-peen to add to your signature on gaming forums and pretend you know what you are talking about when defending your purchase to people on the internet...

The only programs that really benefit from faster speed ram are heavy content creation or database/computational software that requires faster access to a lot of page/temp files for manipulation. Meaning spread sheets and photoshop, even then its hard to justify the cost for the minimal performance gains when looking at 2133 or faster OC ram modules. In any case, it's better to invest in low CAS/timings than just faster clocks OR invest in a quad channel motherboard like server boards with Xeon or i7 2011's. Some 1333 cas 7 with very tight timings could beat an 1866 cas 11 with loose timings.

The only real "tangible" gaming improvement is if your CPU uses a GPU core like the APU's from AMD since the on-die GPU core uses system memory. DDR3 RAM, while very fast compared to hard drives and SSD's, are considered mopeds when paired with the most modern version of DDR5 VRAM found in most discrete GPU cards today. Dual Channel DDR3 1600 peaks at 12.8 GB/sec, in contrast DDR5 VRAM in a gtx 680 is 192.2 GB/sec and the AMD 7970 is 264 GB/sec. AMD recommends 1866Mhz or faster RAM and it does show a huge improvement for each bandwidth bump, but then again, they only pair a 7660D GPU core into the latest trinity A10 32nm chips, much slower than your new GTX 660.

I used to run gskill 6GB cas 7 1600's, now I run samsung 30nm 24GB cas 11 1600 1.35v that I've overclocked to 2133 at cas 9 1.6v; I find almost no difference in most games.
 
[quote name='JBaz']Stick with the ram you have now. It really makes very little difference in games, may see 1-5% overall performance boost in your system, but expect maybe 1-3fps higher with just a ram bump. That's well within the % of error when running benchmarks. For gaming, anything faster than 1600 is nothing more than e-peen to add to your signature on gaming forums and pretend you know what you are talking about when defending your purchase to people on the internet...

The only programs that really benefit from faster speed ram are heavy content creation or database/computational software that requires faster access to a lot of page/temp files for manipulation. Meaning spread sheets and photoshop, even then its hard to justify the cost for the minimal performance gains when looking at 2133 or faster OC ram modules. In any case, it's better to invest in low CAS/timings than just faster clocks OR invest in a quad channel motherboard like server boards with Xeon or i7 2011's. Some 1333 cas 7 with very tight timings could beat an 1866 cas 11 with loose timings.

The only real "tangible" gaming improvement is if your CPU uses a GPU core like the APU's from AMD since the on-die GPU core uses system memory. DDR3 RAM, while very fast compared to hard drives and SSD's, are considered mopeds when paired with the most modern version of DDR5 VRAM found in most discrete GPU cards today. Dual Channel DDR3 1600 peaks at 12.8 GB/sec, in contrast DDR5 VRAM in a gtx 680 is 192.2 GB/sec and the AMD 7970 is 264 GB/sec. AMD recommends 1866Mhz or faster RAM and it does show a huge improvement for each bandwidth bump, but then again, they only pair a 7660D GPU core into the latest trinity A10 32nm chips, much slower than your new GTX 660.

I used to run gskill 6GB cas 7 1600's, now I run samsung 30nm 24GB cas 11 1600 1.35v that I've overclocked to 2133 at cas 9 1.6v; I find almost no difference in most games.[/QUOTE]

Thank you, no ram upgrade for me, good thing because i need to stop spending money lol My computer was delivered today while I was at work, cant wait to get off work and mess around with it
 
I got the computer and love it, but ran into a problem.

I took out the Geforce GT 545, and tried to replace it with the Geforce GTX 660. Granted I never replaced or upgraded a computer in my life. I just uninstalled the 545, and replaced it with the GTX 660, hooking it up with the cable listed as P16, just as it was to the other video card.

I turn it back on, and the resolution looks terrible (Talking like resolution from the 90's), I checked my Hardware Device panel, and under display adapters I dont see the GTX 660, I only see Standard VGA Graphics Adapter.

I still have the drivers of the GT 545 installed, or do I need to install the CD/w drivers that came with the new graphics card? I thought you dident because their both Nvidia cards?

Solved----Just had to install the drivers for GTX 600 Series : )
 
Last edited by a moderator:
First thing I did was 3DMARK 11 Graphic Benchmarking

GT 545 (Came with computer) Score 2100
GTX 660 (Replaced 545 with the GTX 660) Score 6885

These test where all without OC or tweaks, I love the jump in performance.

Im running the i7 2600k at stock 3.4, I might activate OC1 (3.8) or possibly OC2 (4.1)
 
I just did OC lvl 1 to CPU and played The Secret World (Ultra Graphic/All advance settings on Ultra) Direct X11 Graphical enhancements enabled on Max (Tessellation: Max, SSAO:MAX, Anti-alias: TXAA 4x)

Open field/few NPCS: 65-70 FPS
Secondary City's: 55-58 FPS
Capitals/Faction City (aka London) 45-55 FPS
Frantic battles/many enemies/party of teamates: 50 FPS
Dungeons/w full party (Polaris,Kingsmouth Dungeon) 60-65 FPS
Solo instances/Story Dungeons 75-85 FPS

I could not imagine the difference of an upgrade in a computer can make. I always shun PC gaming for the longest time, because aka always got to upgrade, games dont look as good as consoles, but in reality I was playing with a bundget gaming machine. I can appreciate PC gaming now, and officially addictive to STEAM!

I havent had a Desktop in such a longtime (only laptops/Tablets) that I couldent get internet to work on my new Alienware Aura.....found out typically desktops dont come with WiFi cards lol, I had to go to BestBuy and buy a 25' Cat6 Ethernet cord, I notice a big difference (Laptop usually 1.2 DL using Wifi, my Aurora is 2.4 DL using ethernet cable to router) in having a direct connection to router/modem rather then wireless when downloading.
 
Last edited by a moderator:
Even the three generations old Wifi B with a good signal would allow for 5.5 Mbits/sec up and 5.5 down bandwidth (802.11 b spec). Then again, it's all dependent on signal strength/degradation, EMI interference, driver optimization, wifi routing capability of the host device and/or wifi cards themselves or even the network switching performance of everything between your PC to the actual modem (routers, switches, hubs, etc). Don't blame wifi for bandwidth shortcomings as most wifi routers/access points will have no problem with operating above the average american broadband bandwidth in normal household settings with good signal coverage.

I myself use a commercial grade long range wifi access point that boosts 150 each way that covers a broad 500-600 ft radius. I can still get decent signal strength from neighboring houses, although the throughput is halved. For my internal home network, its beyond necessary and as for internet abilities, I'm still limited to my 10/1 TWC internet. If I had Verizon FIOS 150/65 like a few friends have in the DC area, I would probably upgrade the access point, but since only 12 million people are able to get this, I have no need for it.
 
[quote name='JBaz']Even the three generations old Wifi B with a good signal would allow for 5.5 Mbits/sec up and 5.5 down bandwidth (802.11 b spec). Then again, it's all dependent on signal strength/degradation, EMI interference, driver optimization, wifi routing capability of the host device and/or wifi cards themselves or even the network switching performance of everything between your PC to the actual modem (routers, switches, hubs, etc). Don't blame wifi for bandwidth shortcomings as most wifi routers/access points will have no problem with operating above the average american broadband bandwidth in normal household settings with good signal coverage.

I myself use a commercial grade long range wifi access point that boosts 150 each way that covers a broad 500-600 ft radius. I can still get decent signal strength from neighboring houses, although the throughput is halved. For my internal home network, its beyond necessary and as for internet abilities, I'm still limited to my 10/1 TWC internet. If I had Verizon FIOS 150/65 like a few friends have in the DC area, I would probably upgrade the access point, but since only 12 million people are able to get this, I have no need for it.[/QUOTE]

TestMySpeed I get 15mb dl (my cable provider rates mine at 19mb/sec plan) on my laptop wifi

Aurora with direct ethernetcable connection I get the 19mb/sec rated
 
[quote name='Mako1215']What wifi booster are you using? I need one for my n56u, and see if it will help out.[/QUOTE]
Wifi access point isn't a 'booster', I was using the verb in the context that I was going from wireless b/g to n is an upgrade or a 'boost'. 150 up and 150 down is the standard n; with mimo, it doubles up to 300 each way, but I wasn't willing to spend the premium for a commercial version of mimo when my needs are limited and all I wanted was a more powerful antenna for longer range that lacks on consumer wifi routers and access points.

The biggest problem I had with consumer wifi devices is that they never had the power or range that I needed to cover my house entirely. Put it on one side and couldn't get any signal on the other, put it in the middle and the amount of walls would degrade the signal to the edges of the house to be almost useless; not only that but its also a brick house and the signal gets seriously limited outside. I have the commercial access point on one side of the house and I still get 80% signal strength to the other. Before, my wireless n router would barely hit 14% or just not be registering at all.

If I wanted to, I could upgrade it to a powered antenna and cover my entire neighborhood... if I was willing to throw down some serious cash.
 
Last edited by a moderator:
Yea that's kind of the position I'm in. My router seems to be getting severely cut by the walls in my house.

I need something with a stronger signal/data output. I'm tired of lagging when I'm on xbl
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
bread's done
Back
Top