Multi Monitor Development Machine

diarmuid05

So guys, I've finally decided to get myself a decent setup at home as it's becoming a bit annoying trying to get any dev work done on my laptop.
I would appreciate any help,

Main priority is a fast machine that can have a lot of dev tools open together and is responsive when debugging etc.

1. What is your budget? €1000 but can go higher if it's required

2. What will be the main purpose of the computer? Software/Web Development, Visual Studio 2012, Multi-Threading, Photoshop, Illustrator some data/number crunching. Also some gaming (Civ5, Football Manager, Crusaders Kings 2 etc) would like ability to play others but wouldn't be worried about high graphics settings

3. Do you need a copy of Windows? No

4. Can you use any parts from an old computer? No

5. Do you need a monitor? Yes starting with 2 but i want ability to go to 3/4 eventually when finance allows
5a. If yes, what size do you need. Not sure, but i would like to end up with 4 the same

6. Do you need any of these peripherals? Wireless card.

7. Are you willing to try overclocking? Probably not

8. How can you pay? Any

9. When are you purchasing? Hopefully before end of the month

10. If you need help building it, where are you based? I'm in Galway but will probably use the assembly option

Serephucus

Something like this as a starting point:

Item|Price
FRACTAL DESIGN Gehäuse Define Mini|€84.00
ASRock H77M, Sockel 1155,mATX|€66.14
Intel Core i7-3770K Box, LGA1155|€291.31
2 x 8GB Corsair XMS3 PC3-10667U CL9-9-9-24|€75.48
Crucial M4 128GB SSD 6,4cm (2,5")|€100.79
2 x Dell U2312HM silber|€380.06
Super-Flower Amazon 80Plus 450W|€45.99
Shipping|€18.99
Total|€1062.76

I've given you a small-ish case, that will still handle everything you need it to. It will be a very powerful development machine, the only thing is that I couldn't squeeze in a GPU. The 3770K has a decent one onboard, so you'll probably be able to play at least a few games, they'll just probably be on low-ish settings.

The reason is that I included two pretty damn high-end IPS monitors. You can change these if you like to something cheaper, and you could easily cut the price in half, but there are some very big advantages to IPS displays. Better contrast, colour reproduction, and viewing angles, to name a few.

If you want to add a graphics card that will push four displays, the GTX 660 is the lowest one I know of that will allow four. It will also handle games quite nicely as well.

diarmuid05

Serephucus wrote: »

Something like this as a starting point:

Item|Price
FRACTAL DESIGN Gehäuse Define Mini|€84.00
ASRock H77M, Sockel 1155,mATX|€66.14
Intel Core i7-3770K Box, LGA1155|€291.31
2 x 8GB Corsair XMS3 PC3-10667U CL9-9-9-24|€75.48
Crucial M4 128GB SSD 6,4cm (2,5")|€100.79
2 x Dell U2312HM silber|€380.06
Super-Flower Amazon 80Plus 450W|€45.99
Shipping|€18.99
Total|€1062.76

I've given you a small-ish case, that will still handle everything you need it to. It will be a very powerful development machine, the only thing is that I couldn't squeeze in a GPU. The 3770K has a decent one onboard, so you'll probably be able to play at least a few games, they'll just probably be on low-ish settings.

The reason is that I included two pretty damn high-end IPS monitors. You can change these if you like to something cheaper, and you could easily cut the price in half, but there are some very big advantages to IPS displays. Better contrast, colour reproduction, and viewing angles, to name a few.

If you want to add a graphics card that will push four displays, the GTX 660 is the lowest one I know of that will allow four. It will also handle games quite nicely as well.

Thanks for the input, it's much appreciated as i wasn't sure where to start.

I was looking at this monitorhttp://www.amazon.co.uk/gp/product/B0074H1SD0/ref=noref?ie=UTF8&psc=1&s=computers

Don't think i would need or even benefit from those IPS Dells and it would be a serious stretch to get 4 of those bad boys.

Serephucus

Someone else was looking at that monitor as well, in this thread. It was between that one and another one.

I'd recommend a look at the other one (the LG) in that thread as well. The specs on the Samsung mean it's quite difficult to nail down what panel it's using, so I wouldn't even be able to hazard a guess at image quality.

For the sake of argument, two LGs comes to €260, which is a €120 saving over the Dells. Now, if you could find another €70, that would be your quad monitor capable graphics card sorted.

diarmuid05

OK now i'm getting somewhere

I've added a hard-drive, disk-drive and wireless card(please recommend better alternatives) to leave me with....

Item|Price
Intel Core i7-3770K Box, LGA1155|€291.31
Gigabyte GeForce GTX 660 Windforce 2X, 2GB GDDR5, 2x DVI, HDMI, DisplayPort|€192.11
Seagate Barracuda 7200 2000GB, SATA 6Gb/s|€85.04
Samsung SH-224BB bare schwarz|€17.14
ASUS PCE-N10|€14.90
ASRock H77M, Sockel 1155,mATX|€66.14
2 x 8GB Corsair XMS3 PC3-10667U CL9-9-9-24|€75.48
Super-Flower Amazon 80Plus 450W|€45.99
FRACTAL DESIGN Gehäuse Define Mini|€84.00
Crucial M4 128GB SSD 6,4cm (2,5")|€100.79
Shipping|€18.99
Total|€991.89

Plus 2 of these http://www.amazon.co.uk/LG-IPS224V-inch-Backlit-Monitor/dp/B008F7GVZS/ref=pd_cp_computers_0

I don't mind increasing the budget at all, I've been a while waiting to put this build together

Serephucus

Looks good.

I noticed you removed the solid state drive? Have you used one before / do you know the benefits, etc.? I'd seriously consider one if you haven't used one before. I've been using one for the last two years, and since then, I've upgraded my girlfriend's laptop, my family's PC, my dad laptop, and my brother's laptop, all to SSDs. They're that good.

Improvement options: (Just throwing them out there so you have all the facts, etc.)

Homeplugs, instead of a WiFi card.
These generally off much better speed, and typically lower latancies than WiFi. They can be subject to electrical interference from other active equipment though. I've never personally used them, so I can't give recommendations on specific hardware, I'm just throwing the general tech out there.

An 80+ Gold PSU for a more efficient rig.
It won't really affect performance as such, but it would mean the PSU fan will probably spin slower, the whole unit would probably last longer, and your ESB bill won't mind the change either.

A Z77 motherboard.
I actually meant to change the CPU to a 3770. I kept the 3770K in there by mistake. It's only about €15 difference, but the 3770K allows you to overclock, the 3770 doesn't. If you want to overclock, you'll also need a motherboard that supports it. So an extra €8 here would get you that.

A third-party CPU cooler.
This would help given the option above. It would keep your CPU running cooler, give you greater overclocking headroom, and make the machine that bit quieter (those stock Intel coolers can be downright annoying when the CPU heats up)

Wossack

Stands are good on the Dells, and allow rotation into portrait mode - very nice for dev work. And being IPS based, no degradation in portrait mode (afaik)
They are also easily detachable and leave behind a standard vesa mount - very handy for multi monitor set ups

typically also come pre callibrated, and dell have a defective pixel policy - on the ultra sharps, I think thats 1 dead/stuck pixel and they'll replace it

just worth considering.. though yes, price difference multiplied by 4 certainly adds up

diarmuid05

OK going on the latest recommendations, this is where i'm at....

I've taken out the wireless card, as the router is in the same room, just need to run a cable in attic.

Leaving out the SSD was a mistake, back in its correct place

and for the sake of a few quid i've upgraded a couple of items.

Really appreciate the help.

Item|Price
Intel Core i7-3770K Box, LGA1155|€291.31
Gigabyte GeForce GTX 660 Windforce 2X, 2GB GDDR5, 2x DVI, HDMI, DisplayPort|€192.11
Seagate Barracuda 7200 2000GB, SATA 6Gb/s|€85.04
Samsung SH-224BB bare schwarz|€17.14
2 x 8GB Corsair XMS3 PC3-10667U CL9-9-9-24|€75.48
FRACTAL DESIGN Gehäuse Define Mini|€84.00
Crucial M4 128GB SSD 6,4cm (2,5")|€100.79
Super-Flower SF450P14XE Golden Green Pro 80plus gold|€67.99
ASRock Z77M, Sockel 1155, mATX|€75.73
Cooler Master Hyper 212 EVO - Intel/AMD|€29.40
Shipping|€18.99
Total|€1037.98

Plus 2 of these Monitors

srsly78

High resolution monitors are good for gamers and developers. A 2560x1600 screen simply give you more real-estate to use. The larger dells don't rotate tho, is the only downside.

The PC itself is not a big deal, any build these days will support multiple monitors. I would say get a cheap graphics card tho, don't rely on integrated graphics for it. Can easily have 3 monitors or more if you want.

You don't need an i7, an i5 is fine (and actually faster in a lot of cases).

So, spend the bucks on your monitors - not on your pc. Or do both

ED E

Yeah, I'd suggest you look for a mounting system. It'd mean less hassle when you upgrade if you got a 4 way when you build and anchor it to the desk.

Serephucus

I assume that build will go with the LG monitors? Bad-ass.

There's also the thought that you don't necessarily need the optical drive. I dunno about you, but I hate them. Loud, slow, and they take ages to spin up. You can install Windows from a USB drive, and that's about the only time I ever use mine.

(I actually had it unplugged internally for six months and never noticed. )

RE Cheap AMD card: That won't always work. Almost all of the cheaper cards have three display outputs, but they'll only allow the simultaneous use of two.

RE Mounting solution: Great idea. It can be expensive, but I absolutely love my Ergotron LX (only a single display mount, mind)

diarmuid05

Thanks for all the advice guys, a little more than i intended to spend but 1 more paycheck should do it

Currently researching mounting solutions

ED E

I got my arms from amazon. 30 odd for two, delivered. They dont swivel but were cheap and are very solid. You'd want something more advanced for 4, but amazon would still be my first port of call.

diarmuid05

ED E wrote: »

I got my arms from amazon. 30 odd for two, delivered. They dont swivel but were cheap and are very solid. You'd want something more advanced for 4, but amazon would still be my first port of call.

What i have in mind is a 1x4 setup rather than a 2x2, so i don't think i need any mounting after all

ED E

diarmuid05 wrote: »

What i have in mind is a 1x4 setup rather than a 2x2, so i don't think i need any mounting after all

If its in a corner or you plan on 4x vertical then fire ahead, but I wouldnt if they're to be in a straight line, too much neck work.

diarmuid05

ED E wrote: »

If its in a corner or you plan on 4x vertical then fire ahead, but I wouldnt if they're to be in a straight line, too much neck work.

Point taken. Starting with 2 for now anyway, so will see how it looks when i get around to adding more

Serephucus

Yeah, unless they're quite far from you, I think 4x16:9 would be too much. Maybe if you had 4:3s or something.

Have a look at this while you're at it:
http://www.anandtech.com/bench/Product/701?vs=551

Delete the benchmarks that aren't applicable to you, and see what you've left with. Then you can decide if the 3770K is worth it over the 3570K. The only difference is Hyperthreading (4/8 cores/threads vs. 4/4 cores/threads on the 3570K). A 35 is roughly two thirds the price of the 37.

Wossack

I've seen 3 in a row, with another over the center, and it looks well

still reckon alot of vertical space is a boon for dev work - so I'd probably go 4x1 in portrait (ideally 5 hah..).

16:9 monitors all lined horizontally - yep, thats neckbrace territory :P

srsly78

Serephucus wrote: »

Delete the benchmarks that aren't applicable to you, and see what you've left with. Then you can decide if the 3770K is worth it over the 3570K. The only difference is Hyperthreading (4/8 cores/threads vs. 4/4 cores/threads on the 3570K). A 35 is roughly two thirds the price of the 37.

Good links, but your explanation is pretty poor. The HT doesn't give free threads, it only works well for certain embarassingly parallel tasks like encoding. As can be seen from the benchmarks it fails pretty hard when it comes to compiling stuff, actually imposing a performance penalty. In many high performance computing applications standard procedure is to disable hyper threading in the bios (if you do this you lose the performance penalty).

So OP do you want to pay e100 extra for a chip that will perform worse? Or do you want to save e100 and have a chip that performs better? It's a no-brainer.

diarmuid05

srsly78 wrote: »

So OP do you want to pay e100 extra for a chip that will perform worse? Or do you want to save e100 and have a chip that performs better? It's a no-brainer.

Now i'm confused...

There must be more reasons to get an i7 over an i5
I really don't know enough about it to make any kind of informed decision...

Serephucus

srsly78 wrote: »

Good links, but your explanation is pretty poor. The HT doesn't give free threads, it only works well for certain embarassingly parallel tasks like encoding. As can be seen from the benchmarks it fails pretty hard when it comes to compiling stuff, actually imposing a performance penalty. In many high performance computing applications standard procedure is to disable hyper threading in the bios (if you do this you lose the performance penalty).

So OP do you want to pay e100 extra for a chip that will perform worse? Or do you want to save e100 and have a chip that performs better? It's a no-brainer.

I never said it did. I simply stated that the i7 can handle twice as many threads as the i5, which is true. I then linked to the most comprehensive benchmark comparison I knew of that showed the differences, and informed the OP of the price. Did I say anywhere that the i7 would be twice as fast as the i5, or anything else misleading? No.

srsly78

It's not true. It does not handle twice as many threads, unless you are Intel salesperson. I said your explanation was poor, not misleading.

If it handled double the threads, then it would have a much bigger performance boost. Rather it handles extra pseudo-threads for SIMD operations - which is not the same thing at all.

If you do a lot of video encoding then maybe this is worthwhile (parallel pixel operations take advantage of hyper threading). Normal thread operations do not benefit.

Wossack

unless Im reading it wrong, the anandtech link above has the i7 ahead of the i5 in most all operations.. I dont see the pretty hard fail in compiling

Serephucus

srsly78 wrote: »

It's not true. It does not handle twice as many threads, unless you are Intel salesperson. I said your explanation was poor, not misleading.

If it handled double the threads, then it would have a much bigger performance boost. Rather it handles extra pseudo-threads for SIMD operations - which is not the same thing at all.

If you do a lot of video encoding then maybe this is worthwhile (parallel pixel operations take advantage of hyper threading). Normal thread operations do not benefit.

Ok, point taken. Let me rephrase correctly then: Each core is capable of processing two threads. Each thread isn't handled as efficiently as if the processor had HT disabled (note I never said anything to contradict this originally) but it can still handle two threads per core. Does this equate to 2x real-world performance? Hell no, even in the best scenarios.

I don't know how much this would benefit the OP (I left it up to him to determine if his applications would benefit or not, perhaps I should have asked for more specifics) probably not enough to signify the extra 50% in price, I guess that's the bottom line.

Hey diarmuid, you've got an extra €90 to spend on that monitor solution! :P


Edit: Wossack, it is, but in most cases it's not far enough ahead to justify the price tag. If the OP needs that level of performance then fair enough, but otherwise it's less bang-for-buck than the 3570.

srsly78

Wossack look again, the 2 benchmarks involving compilation show the i5 outperforming. All the other benchmarks are encoding or hybrid ones.

OP should get an i5, so should most other people.

Wossack

think you're just looking at the graphs, and not what they represent? firefox compile is 5 mins faster on the i7 by those charts

Serephucus

Yeah the graphs aren't all equal. On quite a few lower is better as it's done in time taken. Not an ideal format for presentation I have to say.

srsly78

Oops you are right, I just assumed. There are definitely benchmarks out there showing the i7 performing worse tho.

Serephucus

Agreed, but it's not all bad. Even so though it goes back to my point: the performance difference isn't worth the price. I actually thought the i7 would do better than it does, I assumed a bit too much when I originally specced it.

Wossack

dont pick me up wrong as being an i7 fanboi btw, it was more that I thought I was reading the graphs wrong

agree with the iffy hyperthreading performance (we disable it on servers in work for some applications - under vendor recommendations), and that the i5 is in the definite sweet spot for price vs performance. Difference in price would be better spent elsewhere in this instance

diarmuid05

i5 it is then...

Learning a lot today

Item|Price
Gigabyte GeForce GTX 660 Windforce 2X, 2GB GDDR5, 2x DVI, HDMI, DisplayPort|€192.11
Seagate Barracuda 7200 2000GB, SATA 6Gb/s|€85.04
Samsung SH-224BB bare schwarz|€17.14
2 x 8GB Corsair XMS3 PC3-10667U CL9-9-9-24|€75.48
FRACTAL DESIGN Gehäuse Define Mini|€84.00
Crucial M4 128GB SSD 6,4cm (2,5")|€100.79
Super-Flower SF450P14XE Golden Green Pro 80plus gold|€67.99
ASRock Z77M, Sockel 1155, mATX|€75.73
Cooler Master Hyper 212 EVO - Intel/AMD|€29.40
Rechner - Zusammenbau|€20.00
Intel Core i5-3570K Box, LGA1155|€202.82
Shipping|€18.99
Total|€969.49

Plus 2 of these Monitors

Wossack

its a few pennies cheaper to get the 16GB corsair kit

http://lb.hardwareversand.de/articledetail.jsp?aid=61903&agid=1192

same stuff, just packaged together

I'd also try stretch to the 840 pro ssd -
http://lb.hardwareversand.de/articledetail.jsp?aid=67801&agid=1145

but the m4 is much loved, and well tried and tested at this stage - just write speeds are a bit slower

diarmuid05

Wossack wrote: »

its a few pennies cheaper to get the 16GB corsair kit

http://lb.hardwareversand.de/articledetail.jsp?aid=61903&agid=1192

same stuff, just packaged together

I'd also try stretch to the 840 pro ssd -
http://lb.hardwareversand.de/articledetail.jsp?aid=67801&agid=1145

but the m4 is much loved, and well tried and tested at this stage - just write speeds are a bit slower

Think i'm good to go with the m4, is there any advantage on the other RAM other than the few pennies?

Is there any alternative cases i should look at?

Wossack

Im pretty sure its the exact same RAM, just comes prepackaged as a double pack from Corsair

srsly78

Wossack wrote: »

dont pick me up wrong as being an i7 fanboi btw, it was more that I thought I was reading the graphs wrong

agree with the iffy hyperthreading performance (we disable it on servers in work for some applications - under vendor recommendations), and that the i5 is in the definite sweet spot for price vs performance. Difference in price would be better spent elsewhere in this instance

Here are some benchmarks showing the i5 outperforming the i7: http://www.anandtech.com/bench/Product/701?vs=551 (edit: bah it isn't saving the filter - select gaming benchmarks and you can see)

For gaming or anything single-threaded the i5 usually comes out on top.

Wossack

just re the monitors;
the guys might know - is displayport needed for multimonitor setups, or is that just eyefinity?

Serephucus

Just Eyefinity.

srsly78

Also possibly needed if you have 2x high resolution 27" or 30" monitors. The normal hdmi/dvi ports can't handle these. Most graphics cards usually only have one dual link dvi port - so if you have 2 high res monitors then you often need displayport for the second.

Depends on graphics card, there is no standard for number/type of outputs.

J-blk

srsly78 wrote: »

Most graphics cards usually only have one dual link dvi port - so if you have 2 high res monitors then you often need displayport for the second.

Depends on graphics card, there is no standard for number/type of outputs.

The DVI ports on the GTX680 for example can drive two DVI dual link 27" 2560x1440 monitors - that's my current setup.

Portlawslim

Just a point on the monitors, that Samsung one your thinking of is not wall mountable! make sure whatever you go for is VESA compatable.
Correct me if I'm wrong lads....:o

Serephucus

He was looking at a Samsung, he's now going with two LGs (fourth or fifth post down) and they are. Had to check though, nice catch.

spix

You shouldn't rule out this card, supports 4 monitors

http://lb.hardwareversand.de/articledetail.jsp?aid=71250&agid=1004&pvid=4npkx6e3f_hcuvzsho&ref=13

Having monitors with adjustable stands (swivel/rotate etc) is a big plus for multi monitor setups.

http://www.amazon.co.uk/exec/obidos/ASIN/b008lzo9da/geizhals07-21/ref=nosim?m=A3P5ROKL5A1OLE or the dell u2312hm would be good choices.

frozenfrozen

Are you sure you need 4 monitors? I've got one dell U2711 and an apple cinema 22" and I never find myself looking for more space, 4 monitors would be really cool though but the money might be better spent elsewhere in the build

diarmuid05

Just looking at future proofing...

I realize 16GB is plenty at the moment but this build has to last a few years.

So i was looking at this board instead

http://lb.hardwareversand.de/DDR3/59321/ASRock+Z77+Pro4-M%2C+Sockel+1155%2C+mATX.article

Any reason this one wouldn't work?

Serephucus

Nope, that'll work fine too.

deejer

diarmuid05 wrote: »

Think i'm good to go with the m4, is there any advantage on the other RAM other than the few pennies?

Is there any alternative cases i should look at?

The fractel design cases are relatively cheap and have the sound proofing. Personally Im not crazy about a front door. It does alot more for astetics that it does for the practicalities of ventalation.

Another option would be something from the Corsair Line - 200R/300R or C70 which can be got for around the same money (C70 is a bit dearer).

BloodBath

Just a point about the 3770k vs the 3570k.

Clock for clock they will perform identical in single threaded apps. The performance doesn't drop. I have seen this in every single gaming benchmark. There is no difference outside the margin of error.

If games started making more use of cpu based physics then then 3770k would hammer the 3570k. This can be seen in physics benchmarks on the likes of 3dmark where the HT chips outperform their single thread counterparts by at least 50% on the physics tests.

In multi thread the 3770k always comes out on top.

More becnhmarks showing the 3770k winning every test.
http://www.xbitlabs.com/articles/cpu/display/core-i7-3770k-i5-3570k_5.html#sect0

Now i'm not saying it's worth an extra €90. To most people it isn't, but for some it is.

srsly78

Those are hybrid benchmarks, they include encoding stuff....

Gaming benchmarks showing the 3570k consistently winning were already posted. Lets see you post some evidence otherwise.

Also not true that "in multi thread the 3770k always comes out on top". There are different kinds of parallel operation, HT does a big fat nothing for most of them. Assume you have 4 threads operating on different datasets - HT does nothing here. 3770k will perform worse because of overhead.

Where it does work is if you have say 8 threads, with a pair of threads each operating on the same dataset. This is very common with physics and graphics. Even then HT doesn't actually provide much boost (50% = intel salesperson).

Do you actually know anything about this subject, or are you just repeating what you read off some website? I'm a c++ developer (with some gamedev background), and I write multithreaded code all day. For my own machine I chose a 2500k for last box, then a 3570k for current box.

Have you tried overclocking with HT? Most people recommend turning it off if you try.


Some reading for you:
http://bitsum.com/pl_when_hyperthreading_hurts.php
http://semiaccurate.com/2012/04/25/does-disabling-hyper-threading-increase-performance/#.URPd-qX_zu0

BloodBath

Gaming benchmarks showing the 3570k consistently winning were already posted. Lets see you post some evidence otherwise.

If you bothered to check the next page of that article you would see the gaming benchmarks.

http://www.xbitlabs.com/articles/cpu/display/core-i7-3770k-i5-3570k_6.html#sect0

Also not true that "in multi thread the 3770k always comes out on top". There are different kinds of parallel operation, HT does a big fat nothing for most of them. Assume you have 4 threads operating on different datasets - HT does nothing here. 3770k will perform worse because of overhead.

You seem to think that ht performs worse if it's not making use of the extra threads. This is a myth that was debunked in the pentium 4 days.

Where it does work is if you have say 8 threads, with a pair of threads each operating on the same dataset. This is very common with physics and graphics. Even then HT doesn't actually provide much boost (50% = intel salesperson).

Have a look at our very own 3dmark2013 benchmark scores and more specifically at the physics scores in the tests. The HT chips are performing in the region of 50%+ better than their non HT counterparts.

Do you actually know anything about this subject, or are you just repeating what you read off some website? I'm a c++ developer (with some gamedev background), and I write multithreaded code every day. For my own machine I chose a 2500k for last box, then a 3570k for current box.

Don't get cocky. You're only making yourself look like an idiot. I have already proven you wrong.

srsly78

Hardly.

I don't know why you are arguing about this tho, it's not a disputed fact. HT does impose a very small 1-2% performance penalty in certain situations - clearly shown in lots of benchmarks from reputable sources. But on the other hand it also provides a big performance boost in other situations.

You do realise that everyone doing high performance computing disables it right? Maybe you should go and tell all those scientists they are doing it wrong.

edit: lol maybe you should go back and take a look at your own benchmarks, they show the 3570k on top in some of them. Yeah you really showed me...

BloodBath

1-2% difference is usually within the margin of error of any benchmark. You will never consistently get the same scores. There will always be a 1-2% difference.