Description

I built this computer to be ready for the Rift, so it was intended to exactly meet the Oculus recommended spec. I bought most of the parts around Black Friday, but I finally got my last rebate today so I decided that now was the time to post it!

It works great, though I wouldn't recommend the video card -- I had to stick some Dynamat in to reduce the whirring sound it makes.

Comments

  • 45 months ago
  • 3 points

Nice build.+1

Good to know about the gpu.

  • 45 months ago
  • 2 points

Awesome build and great job nabbing those parts for a good price. Bummer on the loud video card though, I'm not a big fan of the blower styles but that price is hard to resist. Gj! +1

Love the 'danger' sticker, gives it some character!

  • 45 months ago
  • 3 points

I'm not a big "fan" of blower styles xD Also, I think blower styles allow you to dissapate air without needing lots of airflow in your case.

  • 45 months ago
  • 2 points

Nice!

Yeah blowers funnel air out the back if I'm not mistaken.

  • 45 months ago
  • 2 points

Solid build, GPU looks nice but the whirring's probably annoying

  • 45 months ago
  • 1 point

would've gone with a 980ti for VR

  • 45 months ago
  • 1 point

Kind of temps are you getting? everything seems so crammed

That's a cool looking case! +1

[comment deleted]
[comment deleted by staff]
  • 45 months ago
  • 5 points

The 3.5 buffer doesn't even matter, I have one and every game I play (GTA V, Witcher 3) run fantastic. People only got upset because they weren't told it was 3.5gb due to a marketing flaw on Nvidia's end. Still a fantastic card and will probably perform better temperature wise.

[comment deleted by staff]
  • 45 months ago
  • 1 point

This is not how memory allocation works; applications don't block out a specific, absolute amount for memory consumption. It's based on formulas which use your system specs as input.

If that were true, then games that you are running and utilizing 4.5GB of vram for, literally could not run on systems with 4GB or less. But that obviously isn't true. Just because you can see higher vram usage doesn't mean that is what the game requires.

Benchmarks don't lie. Go read up. The 970 can perform quite wonderfully at 2K on high/ultra settings. It falters at 4K(again, at high/ultra settings), but most single cards do.

[comment deleted by staff]
  • 45 months ago
  • 4 points

And then i will tell you again that the 390 outperforms the 970 in everhthing exept nvidea supported titles or 1080p

But you literally never "told me" that, so you can't tell me "again". That isn't what we are talking about. We are talking about your claim about memory usage (in this thread anyways).

I am talking to you about facts. If you re-read my previous comment from an objective perspective, you'll realize I never once claimed superiority of the 970 over the 390 nor did I imply the 390 was "bad".

  • 45 months ago
  • 1 point

Most people play on 1080P, you do know that right? the difference of people that play on 1440P and above is HUGE in comparison to how many people play in 1080P. Why? Because most people can only afford 1080P. Next time you want to try and seem smart about computers and the parts they use, do your research before you talk, because you make yourself look really stupid otherwise.

[comment deleted by staff]
  • 45 months ago
  • 2 points

uh huh.

  • 45 months ago
  • 3 points

why 16gb? Why do I keep seeing people trying to reccomend 16gb for gaming?

  • 45 months ago
  • 4 points

Probably because RAM is cheap so it doesn't hurt to spend a little more for the full 16GB.

[comment deleted by staff]
  • 45 months ago
  • 2 points

do not forget the 970 DOES NOT have 4 gigs of vram it only has 3.5

This is a false statement.

[comment deleted by staff]
  • 45 months ago
  • 3 points

Yup this. Maybe hyperbolic but better. Important to remember that if you're not 4K gaming, it's really not going to impact you. EDIT and if you're trying to 4K game and buying a 970, you need to go home and rethink your life.

[comment deleted by staff]
  • 45 months ago
  • 2 points

That's cool man. Not sure what your point is though.

  • 45 months ago
  • 1 point

the last .5gb is still way faster than loading blocks into the system ram through te pcie lanes.
If you get into the last .5gb you'll get some shuttering, if you have to offload to system memory you'll get something similar to thrashing. (you know how when you're on a computer with 512mb of ram and you start a program and everything freezes up and you hear the hdd go into overdrive for several minuits, that's thrashing, and that's what will happen to your game if you have to offload through the pcie lanes)

[comment deleted by staff]
  • 45 months ago
  • 2 points

Gddr5 has a max bandwidth of 7gb/s, ddr2 has a max bandwidth of 6.4gb/s. (And I can site that) so your comparison doesn't even make sense.

you'd much rather use the .5 gb because latency. It probably takes tens of milliseconds for a graphics card to retreave something paged on system memory while the extra .5 should have similar latency to the regular memory.