Is this /g/ approved?

>>55974775
the only reason to get that m.2 drive ever is if you're using an itx board and want to make your system as small as possible, either step up to the 950 pro, or get a normal sata ssd, it'll save you money

>>55974828

Are you talking the mobo or SSD?

>>55974845
the ssd, and they make a 1TB version of it, m.2 is for small systems or for performance without using a pci-e slot

since you're going to be using an atx board there is no reason to get a sata over m.2 interface(the 850 evo m.2) ssd, if you were going with a pci-e over m.2 interface(the 950 pro) ssd it would make sense

you're just paying more for a formfactor you don't need, since you won't get any of the benefits of the m.2 slot other than size, since you'll still be limited to sata speeds, and not the pci-e x4 limitation of 32gb/second of most of the m.2 slots are capable of, so why pay more for the same speed in a different formfactor?

>>55974906
Ah mkay man, Ill check it and grab a different one, though, 1 tb is kind of a price spike since Im on a budget.

Thanks alot for your help dude.

>>55974998
yea i kind of figured which is why i brought it up, about the m.2 850 evos being the same speed as the sata version, while being more expensive

you can get a sandisk ultra 2, 480GB ssd for $130

>>55975097
I dunno man, people are literally praising these Samsung drives. I mean, the reviews are stellar, but mind me asking, which samsung would you recommend? If not, I might end up getting a sandisk one.

one last bump before I crash.


Is a 600w psu good enough for this build?

>>55975119
i'm running a samsung 850 evo, i don't think many users benefit from the 850 pro or 950 pro, unless they are actually limited by sata transfer speeds like editing 4k video or doing some stupid high-res photoshopping and need to move 10-20GB files quickly

if you want to buy the name the samsung 850 evo 500, fits the bill, honestly when it comes to ssds these days you won't really notice a difference between any of the modern drives unless you benchmark them, most people say to get the closest drive to $0.10 per gigabyte, if that $10-20 is worth it to you to get the samsung over the sandisk, that's up to you it's your money, luckily you're shopping in a sweet spot right now, next year 1TB sized drives will likely be the sweet spot, with samsung pushing out their 4TB drive

>>55975256
>Is a 600w psu good enough for this build?
yep, a decent 500w psu would also work nicely, if you don't plan on pushing the limits when overclocking, an evga supernova g2 550 would also work, or something in corsair's rmx lineup

if you plan on adding another card later on, get a 650w psu

>>55974775
I was thinking about working over a similar build but going mATX and going with an i5-4690k. It's a gaming system and there doesn't seem to be much difference between going with them except that the 4690k is a better OCer.

oh and please, don't get a founder's edition 1070, get any of the other versions, MSI's is good, so is evga's, so is gigabyte's

zotac's is fucking huge, but if you can get past it being a huge meme it's a good card

>>55975332
well and ddr3 on the 4690k and ddr4 on the 6600k

it seems to overclock better,, and if you don't plan on keeping it for a long time, like 3-4 years, if you do buy as much ram as you can in case you evr want to upgrade, ddr3 prices will raise in a year or two, and it won't be worth buying

pretty much the only reason i got the 6600k over the 4690k, plus finding an itx board that didn't suck and wasn't stupidly expensive to take it, just made the decision for me

>>55975323
>>55975330

Thanks alot man!

>>55975377
DDR4 benefits are minimal at best, especially at higher CAS. Plus I already have 8gigs of DDR3 which will save a few bucks as well.

>finding an itx board that didn't suck
What you have listed isn't an itx board.

>>55975256
Should be good if you aren't OCing. Then you might want to go with something a bit bigger since PSUs work best at around 50% load.

>>55975390
i'm not op, i'm the guy helping him. . .

and yea i know the benefits are minimal at best, and non-existent for gaming with a single card, i just didn't want to get bent over went i want to get more ram in a few years, since i plan on keeping this build for a long while like i did my last one

>>55975397
actually for maximum efficiency 75-90% is the sweet spot for systems that are only used with all the components loading the psu for a few hours at a time, meaning for a gaming computer, that will be turned off every night and will only be used for gaming 2-6 hours a day

if it were a folding computer or a hosting server, yea over-rating the psu is a good idea, but if not, why buy extra wattage you won't use?

and it depends on on the level of overclocking, small fry stuff with a hyper 212 evo, something that limits your voltage anyways, no point in getting a double over-rated psu, and the video card will hit a thermal limit long before it hits a power limit unless you are running a custom bios, but if that's the arena you're playing in, you would already know that, and know how to calculate how much psu you need, unless you are just barely stepping into that arena, and DIce/LN2 will be in your future

>>55975482
>actually for maximum efficiency 75-90% is the sweet spot for systems that are only used with all the components loading the psu for a few hours at a time
Perhaps my info has gotten old. Got a citation for this? When I was shopping for my PSU a few years back even an 80+gold had better efficiency (not to mention less waste heat produced) at 50% than at 75% or higher. Plus it provides "headroom" for spikes or if you get more components than you originally planned.

>>55975518
shit, i had to fact check myself, yes they are more efficient around 50-60% loading, but, most are still over 90% efficient, so it doesn't really matter, as long as you aren't overloading it, so i don't see a point in running a 800+ watt psu for a system while under load pulling 400 watts

even putting a d15 on a 6600k and pushing it to it's limit, you won't be pulling more than 250 watts, yea a 1070 can pull a fair bit more, but not 400 watts from a 650 watt psu, you'll hit other limits first, and you're way more likely to know what you need if you are playing in that arena to begin with, he wouldn't ask if he were in that league, and stepping into that league on a budget is a dumb idea, if it's your only computer

overclocking at that level is for people with money to burn, a mild overclock of a 6600k 4.4-4.6GHz is way more likely, and unless you're pushing crazy volts through it to get there, you won't be needing a d15/r1 ultimate/whatever other 140mm fan'd dual tower cooler, unless you want it super quiet


all i'm saying unless you are pushing limits of your parts, don't buy super over-rated psus, the average user can be very happy with a 15-35% over-rated psu, and still get decent efficiency with a gold rated psu, not everyone is aiming for the stars when it comes to overclocking