Help with SSD and monitor (building PC)

[Deleted1219558User]

Hey, guys. I'm making the jump from consoles to PC and I'm very much new to all of this. I recently had someone help me with a $1300 build, the specs being:

 

I5 4690k

GTX 980 Ti

8 GB 2x4

MSI Z97 PC Mate

 

Originally, they suggested I get a 128 ssd, but another person suggested that I go higher seeing as how I wanted to mod the game. So, I was thinking about getting an Evo 850 500gb.

 

However, I'm considering the 250gb now because my monitor sucks and I would like to get a new one as well (my current one is an old Acer X223W 1680x1050 60 hz) and by going with the 250gb, I'd be able to get the monitor sooner rather than 2 months from now. Also, if I were to go with the 500gb, would I be able to run the new PC on my current monitor?

 

What would you guys do?

Edited July 11, 2015 by Guest

[obobski]

All of those are fairly small in terms of capacity - 128GB is not suitable for a gaming PC imho (you will fill it very quickly just with Windows and a few games). 500GB would be much more comfortable for that.

 

As far as the monitor - what kind of inputs does it accept? If it has something in-common with the GTX 980 Ti, it would work. 980's specifications are available here: http://www.geforce.com/hardware/desktop-gpus/geforce-gtx-980-ti/specifications

 

It may not support HDCP, however, which will limit functionality with some HD content (e.g. Blu-ray playback).

 

Side question: what are you planning to use to power this?

[DarkWarrior45]

What I did with my fiance's computer was I paired the SSD with a 1 TB magnetic drive. All the data goes onto the 1 TB drive and the OS and the applications, such as your games, go onto your SSD. This frees the SSD of some data load. A 500 GB SSD will be more future proof than anything else, but it's still very pricey. Me personally, I would use a 256 GB SSD with a 1 TB magnetic drive.

[Deleted1219558User]

All of those are fairly small in terms of capacity - 128GB is not suitable for a gaming PC imho (you will fill it very quickly just with Windows and a few games). 500GB would be much more comfortable for that.

 

As far as the monitor - what kind of inputs does it accept? If it has something in-common with the GTX 980 Ti, it would work. 980's specifications are available here: http://www.geforce.com/hardware/desktop-gpus/geforce-gtx-980-ti/specifications

 

It may not support HDCP, however, which will limit functionality with some HD content (e.g. Blu-ray playback).

 

Side question: what are you planning to use to power this?

 

Ok, I will probably just go with the 500GB then. As for the monitor, you'll have to forgive me as I'm not sure about the inputs. It's a PnP monitor and on the back it has 3 inputs: VGA, DVI, and AC. I'm not sure if that's what you were looking for though.

 

For the power, I'm using a EVGA Supernova 650 GS.

 

Also, I was looking at this monitor: http://www.amazon.com/Acer-G257HU-smidpx-25-Inch-Widescreen/dp/B00QS0AKVK/ref=sr_1_9?s=pc&ie=UTF8&qid=1436657613&sr=1-9&keywords=acer+monitor

 

What do you think? I'd be able to get this one with the 500 GB, however, the price has me a bit skeptical as it's really cheap compared to other 1440p monitors.

 

 

What I did with my fiance's computer was I paired the SSD with a 1 TB magnetic drive. All the data goes onto the 1 TB drive and the OS and the applications, such as your games, go onto your SSD. This frees the SSD of some data load. A 500 GB SSD will be more future proof than anything else, but it's still very pricey. Me personally, I would use a 256 GB SSD with a 1 TB magnetic drive.

 

Thanks, man. Never heard of the magnetic drive, but I'll look into it. Does it replace the HDD? I recently ordered a 1 TB Hitachi 3.5 HDD which was recommended to go with the build.

Edited July 12, 2015 by Guest

[DarkWarrior45]

 

 

What I did with my fiance's computer was I paired the SSD with a 1 TB magnetic drive. All the data goes onto the 1 TB drive and the OS and the applications, such as your games, go onto your SSD. This frees the SSD of some data load. A 500 GB SSD will be more future proof than anything else, but it's still very pricey. Me personally, I would use a 256 GB SSD with a 1 TB magnetic drive.

 

Thanks, man. Never heard of the magnetic drive, but I'll look into it. Does it replace the HDD? I recently ordered a 1 TB Hitachi 3.5 HDD which was recommended to go with the build.

 

 

Magnetic drive is the same thing as a HDD, just different terminology.

[Deleted1219558User]

 

 

 

What I did with my fiance's computer was I paired the SSD with a 1 TB magnetic drive. All the data goes onto the 1 TB drive and the OS and the applications, such as your games, go onto your SSD. This frees the SSD of some data load. A 500 GB SSD will be more future proof than anything else, but it's still very pricey. Me personally, I would use a 256 GB SSD with a 1 TB magnetic drive.

 

Thanks, man. Never heard of the magnetic drive, but I'll look into it. Does it replace the HDD? I recently ordered a 1 TB Hitachi 3.5 HDD which was recommended to go with the build.

 

 

Magnetic drive is the same thing as a HDD, just different terminology.

 

 

Ok good deal.

[obobski]

 

All of those are fairly small in terms of capacity - 128GB is not suitable for a gaming PC imho (you will fill it very quickly just with Windows and a few games). 500GB would be much more comfortable for that.

 

As far as the monitor - what kind of inputs does it accept? If it has something in-common with the GTX 980 Ti, it would work. 980's specifications are available here: http://www.geforce.com/hardware/desktop-gpus/geforce-gtx-980-ti/specifications

 

It may not support HDCP, however, which will limit functionality with some HD content (e.g. Blu-ray playback).

 

Side question: what are you planning to use to power this?

 

Ok, I will probably just go with the 500GB then. As for the monitor, you'll have to forgive me as I'm not sure about the inputs. It's a PnP monitor and on the back it has 3 inputs: VGA, DVI, and AC. I'm not sure if that's what you were looking for though.

 

For the power, I'm using a EVGA Supernova 650 GS.

 

Also, I was looking at this monitor: http://www.amazon.com/Acer-G257HU-smidpx-25-Inch-Widescreen/dp/B00QS0AKVK/ref=sr_1_9?s=pc&ie=UTF8&qid=1436657613&sr=1-9&keywords=acer+monitor

 

What do you think? I'd be able to get this one with the 500 GB, however, the price has me a bit skeptical as it's really cheap compared to other 1440p monitors.

 

 

What I did with my fiance's computer was I paired the SSD with a 1 TB magnetic drive. All the data goes onto the 1 TB drive and the OS and the applications, such as your games, go onto your SSD. This frees the SSD of some data load. A 500 GB SSD will be more future proof than anything else, but it's still very pricey. Me personally, I would use a 256 GB SSD with a 1 TB magnetic drive.

 

Thanks, man. Never heard of the magnetic drive, but I'll look into it. Does it replace the HDD? I recently ordered a 1 TB Hitachi 3.5 HDD which was recommended to go with the build.

 

 

Use DVI then, but again it may not support HDCP (you'd have to check the manual, or once you get the GTX 980 Ti the nVidia drivers will tell you which connected monitors have HDCP (only digital connections support HDCP (e.g. DVI)). The PSU should be fine (EVGA has been doing good things recently, and 650W should be solid for everything you've got listed).

 

I would generally pass on Acer monitors (or any Acer Group product for that matter) - there's a reason they and their subsidiaries have had multiple class action lawsuits against them over the last decade, and a reason their prices are generally so low: their warranties and customer service are absolutely non-existant, and build quality tends to be below average. Look at Asus, BenQ, Samsung, Dell, NEC, LG, etc instead. I wouldn't limit yourself to 1440p either - there's a lot of different good options for monitors these days.

 

And as DarkWarrior45 said - "magnetic" is just different terminology; I've seen it becoming more common recently as a way to deliniate "conventional mechanical hard-drive" from "solid state hard drive." Conventional mechanical drives use magnetics to read and write data to their platters, hence "magnetic disk." Both conventional mechanical drives and newer solid-state disks are technically/properly "HDDs" or "hard disk drives."

[Deleted1219558User]

 

 

All of those are fairly small in terms of capacity - 128GB is not suitable for a gaming PC imho (you will fill it very quickly just with Windows and a few games). 500GB would be much more comfortable for that.

 

As far as the monitor - what kind of inputs does it accept? If it has something in-common with the GTX 980 Ti, it would work. 980's specifications are available here: http://www.geforce.com/hardware/desktop-gpus/geforce-gtx-980-ti/specifications

 

It may not support HDCP, however, which will limit functionality with some HD content (e.g. Blu-ray playback).

 

Side question: what are you planning to use to power this?

 

Ok, I will probably just go with the 500GB then. As for the monitor, you'll have to forgive me as I'm not sure about the inputs. It's a PnP monitor and on the back it has 3 inputs: VGA, DVI, and AC. I'm not sure if that's what you were looking for though.

 

For the power, I'm using a EVGA Supernova 650 GS.

 

Also, I was looking at this monitor: http://www.amazon.com/Acer-G257HU-smidpx-25-Inch-Widescreen/dp/B00QS0AKVK/ref=sr_1_9?s=pc&ie=UTF8&qid=1436657613&sr=1-9&keywords=acer+monitor

 

What do you think? I'd be able to get this one with the 500 GB, however, the price has me a bit skeptical as it's really cheap compared to other 1440p monitors.

 

 

What I did with my fiance's computer was I paired the SSD with a 1 TB magnetic drive. All the data goes onto the 1 TB drive and the OS and the applications, such as your games, go onto your SSD. This frees the SSD of some data load. A 500 GB SSD will be more future proof than anything else, but it's still very pricey. Me personally, I would use a 256 GB SSD with a 1 TB magnetic drive.

 

Thanks, man. Never heard of the magnetic drive, but I'll look into it. Does it replace the HDD? I recently ordered a 1 TB Hitachi 3.5 HDD which was recommended to go with the build.

 

 

Use DVI then, but again it may not support HDCP (you'd have to check the manual, or once you get the GTX 980 Ti the nVidia drivers will tell you which connected monitors have HDCP (only digital connections support HDCP (e.g. DVI)). The PSU should be fine (EVGA has been doing good things recently, and 650W should be solid for everything you've got listed).

 

I would generally pass on Acer monitors (or any Acer Group product for that matter) - there's a reason they and their subsidiaries have had multiple class action lawsuits against them over the last decade, and a reason their prices are generally so low: their warranties and customer service are absolutely non-existant, and build quality tends to be below average. Look at Asus, BenQ, Samsung, Dell, NEC, LG, etc instead. I wouldn't limit yourself to 1440p either - there's a lot of different good options for monitors these days.

 

And as DarkWarrior45 said - "magnetic" is just different terminology; I've seen it becoming more common recently as a way to deliniate "conventional mechanical hard-drive" from "solid state hard drive." Conventional mechanical drives use magnetics to read and write data to their platters, hence "magnetic disk." Both conventional mechanical drives and newer solid-state disks are technically/properly "HDDs" or "hard disk drives."

 

 

All right thanks! That clears things up for me a bit. I'll probably just have to try it and see. It would suck having the new pc built, but no monitor to use it with for a couple of months though lol. However, I'll just keep the computer I'm using now until then just in case.

 

As for the Acer, I thought I read that they went well with Nvidia cards, but I was probably mistaken (just looked it up and I think it may have been for Asus because of the G-Sync and I got them confused). Either way, I'll probably end up saving up and spending more money because I just read that a 1440p can help a lot with seeing digital art colors better and I work with Photoshopt, so I can justify spending that much money on a monitor for something other than just video games.

 

Also, what do you mean about good options for other monitors? From my understanding, I thought the next step was 4k and the GTX 980 Ti does not do as well unless you have SLI (which can also cause performances issues).

 

One last question, if I do go with a 1440p (or the other monitors you're talking about), should I go with 60 (maybe a little higher) or 144 hz? I don't really play online and I've read that with 144, while the differences are noticeable compared with 60, it's really only useful with competitive gaming which is something I don't plan to do.

Edited July 12, 2015 by Guest

[obobski]

 

All right thanks! That clears things up for me a bit. I'll probably just have to try it and see. It would suck having the new pc built, but no monitor to use it with for a couple of months though lol. However, I'll just keep the computer I'm using now until then just in case.

 

As for the Acer, I thought I read that they went well with Nvidia cards, but I was probably mistaken (just looked it up and I think it may have been for Asus because of the G-Sync and I got them confused). Either way, I'll probably end up saving up and spending more money because I just read that a 1440p can help a lot with seeing digital art colors better and I work with Photoshopt, so I can justify spending that much money on a monitor for something other than just video games.

 

Also, what do you mean about good options for other monitors? From my understanding, I thought the next step was 4k and the GTX 980 Ti does not do as well unless you have SLI (which can also cause performances issues).

 

One last question, if I do go with a 1440p (or the other monitors you're talking about), should I go with 60 (maybe a little higher) or 144 hz? I don't really play online and I've read that with 144, while the differences are noticeable compared with 60, it's really only useful with competitive gaming which is something I don't plan to do.

 

 

There should be no problems at all with the monitor offering DVI - VGA quality on some newer cards is sub-par (I have not seen this one way or another on the 980, but on Fermi and Kepler (which are both older than Maxwell) this is unfortunately the case; analog is certainly on the way out), but DVI should be no issue. If you don't use anything that requires HDCP you could probably go your entire life not knowing about it, and if you need it, you probably already know about it.

 

As far as Acer and "monitors going well with nVidia" - there's really no "brand preference" for nVidia or AMD cards, apart from if you want to support 3D-Vision, G-Sync, or (AMD) Freesync. Otherwise as long as they can plug together, they can work together. Acer does tend to advertise/implement newer features, but that doesn't mean their end-user support and post-sales quality are there to support the products. Asus is a much better manufacturer to consider.

 

On the monitor thing in general - 1440p just refers to the resolution of the monitor (2560x1440). That doesn't actually tell us anything about color quality, picture quality, viewing angles, field rates, input lag, response time, etc which also all impact overall image quality. It isn't a single linear variable that just "goes up" along a continuum. This all applies to any monitor any resolution - even devices that specify 4K are not guranteed to "look better" than other offerings. If color reproduction is very important to you, you should specifically look for that. The primary advantage to higher resolutions is higher pixel pitch, especially if resolution goes up hand-in-hand with screen size, but if overall screen size is not that important, it's nothing to worry about. For example, a 2560x1600 30" monitor has the same pixel pitch as a 1600x1200 20" monitor (both are .250mm), and is similar enough to a 22-24" 1920x1080 monitor (.253-.276mm); they will all have roughly the same "sharpness" as a result, but that doesn't tell us which one will have the best color, response time, etc.

 

When I refer to "other good options" I'm talking about things like higher-refresh displays (e.g. 1080p144) which offer higher temporal resolution, ultra-wide (21:9) panels, among other things. A quality 1080p monitor is still also worth considering, if size isn't of massive importance to you.

 

As far as 144hz "only mattering for competitive gaming" - personally I would disagree. I thoroughly enjoy my 144Hz monitor, and rarely play games online. It is worth noting that Skyrim is largely excluded from that, as it doesn't behave properly at 144 FPS (so I run the monitor at 60Hz and lock Skyrim at 60 FPS with vsync). Many other games do work at higher refresh/frame-rates though.

 

Ultimately the entire monitor discussion comes down to your own preference or needs - pick something that suits your own tastes and needs. All of the specs and numbers are largely there to simplify/enhance that process, but shouldn't be used to dictate what you will or will not like.

[Deleted1219558User]

 

 

All right thanks! That clears things up for me a bit. I'll probably just have to try it and see. It would suck having the new pc built, but no monitor to use it with for a couple of months though lol. However, I'll just keep the computer I'm using now until then just in case.

 

As for the Acer, I thought I read that they went well with Nvidia cards, but I was probably mistaken (just looked it up and I think it may have been for Asus because of the G-Sync and I got them confused). Either way, I'll probably end up saving up and spending more money because I just read that a 1440p can help a lot with seeing digital art colors better and I work with Photoshopt, so I can justify spending that much money on a monitor for something other than just video games.

 

Also, what do you mean about good options for other monitors? From my understanding, I thought the next step was 4k and the GTX 980 Ti does not do as well unless you have SLI (which can also cause performances issues).

 

One last question, if I do go with a 1440p (or the other monitors you're talking about), should I go with 60 (maybe a little higher) or 144 hz? I don't really play online and I've read that with 144, while the differences are noticeable compared with 60, it's really only useful with competitive gaming which is something I don't plan to do.

 

 

There should be no problems at all with the monitor offering DVI - VGA quality on some newer cards is sub-par (I have not seen this one way or another on the 980, but on Fermi and Kepler (which are both older than Maxwell) this is unfortunately the case; analog is certainly on the way out), but DVI should be no issue. If you don't use anything that requires HDCP you could probably go your entire life not knowing about it, and if you need it, you probably already know about it.

 

As far as Acer and "monitors going well with nVidia" - there's really no "brand preference" for nVidia or AMD cards, apart from if you want to support 3D-Vision, G-Sync, or (AMD) Freesync. Otherwise as long as they can plug together, they can work together. Acer does tend to advertise/implement newer features, but that doesn't mean their end-user support and post-sales quality are there to support the products. Asus is a much better manufacturer to consider.

 

On the monitor thing in general - 1440p just refers to the resolution of the monitor (2560x1440). That doesn't actually tell us anything about color quality, picture quality, viewing angles, field rates, input lag, response time, etc which also all impact overall image quality. It isn't a single linear variable that just "goes up" along a continuum. This all applies to any monitor any resolution - even devices that specify 4K are not guranteed to "look better" than other offerings. If color reproduction is very important to you, you should specifically look for that. The primary advantage to higher resolutions is higher pixel pitch, especially if resolution goes up hand-in-hand with screen size, but if overall screen size is not that important, it's nothing to worry about. For example, a 2560x1600 30" monitor has the same pixel pitch as a 1600x1200 20" monitor (both are .250mm), and is similar enough to a 22-24" 1920x1080 monitor (.253-.276mm); they will all have roughly the same "sharpness" as a result, but that doesn't tell us which one will have the best color, response time, etc.

 

When I refer to "other good options" I'm talking about things like higher-refresh displays (e.g. 1080p144) which offer higher temporal resolution, ultra-wide (21:9) panels, among other things. A quality 1080p monitor is still also worth considering, if size isn't of massive importance to you.

 

As far as 144hz "only mattering for competitive gaming" - personally I would disagree. I thoroughly enjoy my 144Hz monitor, and rarely play games online. It is worth noting that Skyrim is largely excluded from that, as it doesn't behave properly at 144 FPS (so I run the monitor at 60Hz and lock Skyrim at 60 FPS with vsync). Many other games do work at higher refresh/frame-rates though.

 

Ultimately the entire monitor discussion comes down to your own preference or needs - pick something that suits your own tastes and needs. All of the specs and numbers are largely there to simplify/enhance that process, but shouldn't be used to dictate what you will or will not like.

 

 

 

All right cool...I'm definitely learning a lot here.

 

With the monitors, I'll be looking at Asus monitors...well that along with BenQ and Dell, but I'll check out more reviews for them first. Screen size is definitely important to me (mainly for my art) and my current monitor is only 21", so 27" would be a huge step up for me. I'll just have to do some more research on it because I do want to take full advantage of the gpu I'm getting.

 

Thanks again for all of your help!