Would you trade your M18xR2 for a desktop?

Here are specs of the desktop. My laptop specs are in my sig.

Case: Enthoo Primo Black
MB: MSI MPower Max
CPU: Intel I5 4690K
Ram: G.Skill RipjawX 2133 16gb (2 x 8 )
GPU: 2 x ZOTAC 980
PSU: Corsair CX750
10 x Sharkoon Shark Blade
SSD OS HyperX 120GB
HDD Seagate 4X500GB RAID0 1.5TB 7200trm

CPU block EK Supremacy Acetal Clean CSQ
GPU Block 2 x EK-FC980 GTX - Acetal clean CSQ
Ram Block EKWB - EK-RAM Monarch Acetal clean csq
2 x backplate Clean CSQ black
res: EK-DDC X-RES 250 CSQ - Acetal DDC
Pump MCP35x PWM
EK DDC x-res
16 x Bitspower C47
EK Tubing
Rad: 2 x RX360
EK pump heat sink
EK UNI holder DDC V2
Custom color Cable (extension)
Coolant, Pastel Yellow

 

No, probably not unless I had an extra $1,500 to $2,000 cash to spend on some basic but critical upgrades to have something fantastic (X99 mobo, 6 or 8 core HT CPU, RAM and 1K or larger PSU). Looks like it has some good components, but a really pathetic CPU. Your 3940XM will tear that CPU to shreds. The other down side is it has been shackled that in-between Haswell turd that's not as potent as the older X79 or the newer X99.

It's a shame it has such a wimpy CPU. It really needs at bare minimum a 4C/8T Devil's Canyon i7 K CPU to be worth considering. Especially for somebody named ht_addict. That CPU ain't got no HT.

It seems like someone was trying to built something amazing and ran out of money, so he made some fatal mistakes in terms of cutting corners on the CPU and PSU. Those specs seem inconsistent with everything else.

 

In terms of specifications I would, but it also depends on whether you need the mobility offered by your laptop.

However, if they're actually trading a fairly new and fully watercooled system with two 980s for an R2 with 7970M Crossfire, I'd seriously question 'why'. Is there something up with the desktop that's making them want to get rid of it? I would make sure that the desktop is in perfect working order before you consider a trade, particularly as it has a custom liquid loop.

How is that CPU pathetic? I haven't seen a single game that makes use of hyperthreading, the only reason I went for an i7 in my new build was because I have the odd thing that does, and when it comes to the potential overclocks out of 4690k and 4790k chips, both seem to be able to reach the same sorts of frequencies and voltages. That 4690k will easily exceed 4.6GHz with sufficient cooling, unless you're extremely unlucky with a terrible chip (very unlikely). As far as gaming is concerned there is zero reason to get an i7 over an equivalent i5, and I haven't yet seen a single game that will make good use of X99 unless you're talking 3-4 GPU setups.

The PSU could be criticised for not being fully modular and only being an 80+ bronze rated unit, but in terms of wattage, 750 is more than enough to cover the entire system, even if the CPU and GPUs are pushed to the limit.

If I were to criticise anything, it'd be the storage configuration, something that's easily fixed.

 

Your laptop for that desktop? I wouldn't. I'd just upgrade the m18x to dual 980Ms.

I got rid of my desktop for my laptop (the clevo in my sig).

My desktop had an i7 quad-core @ 4ghz, 16gb ram, 2x samsung 840 ssds raid0, 2 x 1tb hdds, nVidia GeForce Titan, corsair 800D case, corsair ax1200 psu, lamptron fan controller, a custom liquid cooling loop with a 360mm radiator for the cpu.

If I would get rid of my m18x for a desktop, It'd better have a 5960x, 32gb ddr4 2800+ ram, 2 x gtx 980s minimum.

Luckily my clevo will serve as my desktop replacement hooked up to my corsair k95 rgb keyboard, my razer mamba mouse and monitor/sound system. So really all I lost was my tower full of components. I'll be keeping my m18x still as it might be the last epic system made by Alienware at this rate. :thumbsup:

I'd keep the m18x , but that's just me.

 

Not enough cores, and no hyper-threading to make it even more unattractive... the 3940XM in his laptop will kick it's rear end and leave it to bleed out in a gutter.

You're speaking from the perspective of a gamer that is content to live with adequate, not the views of an extreme performance enthusiast. It's not awesome, I I view it as pathetic. Nothing wrong with either one... depends on what floats your boat. I'm simply answering your question about why I find it to be pathetic and respect your right to have a different definition of what awesome means.

If it had a decent 6 or 8 core CPU and that dual GPU setup, with both heavily overclocked, 750W is not going to be good enough. Here again, with a barely adequate i5 it might be good enough for some, it would be OK for playing games. Yes, storage is easy to fix. That's why I don't bother mentioning that. It's irrelevant when you can drop in a 2TB HDD for under $100 USD.

Plus, look at the forum name of the person asking, LOL. If he truly is a self-proclaimed ht_addict, that CPU absolutely ain't gonna cut it.

 

I have to agree with Mr. Fox, that i5 isn't bad but it's not worth it over the 3940XM.

Also the desktop will have no portability. The m18x r2 is extremely portable while packing a nice amount of performance, especially with 980M sli.

We'll probably have a 980MX or 985M with full 2048 shaders next year anyways.

 

I'm not speaking from the perspective of a gamer content with 'adequate'. Such a gamer doesn't need an overclocked 980 to play games at 1080p.

I am not questioning your right to having an opinion - and I certainly respect yours, after all, I went with a 4790k myself - but I'm questioning whether more than 4 cores makes any significant difference to gaming, even on a two-card setup. Every benchmark I've ever seen suggests that there's maybe a few frames here and there, and that's it. And that's comparing more cores, never mind hyperthreading, for which I have not seen a single case of any significant difference.

Even assuming each of those GPUs pulls 200W heavily overclocked, and the CPU pulls a further 150W, that's 550W...and the rest of the things in the system aren't going to consume another 200W. 750W is easily enough to power the system. It'd certainly be ideal to have an 850-1000W supply to keep the power draw in the most efficient parts of the power-efficiency curve (peaking around 50%) but that system isn't going to be wanting for power.

(Note that I'm not saying that the OP should go for the trade: I'd recommend against it, because I'd prefer having my own hand-built system personally, particularly when you're looking at a custom loop)

 

Some people care about more than just playing games. That i5 might play games fine, as will most of the "high end" AMD CPUs that are equally pathetic, but it's a really lame option if you're into number chasing. If all I wanted to do was play games I would spend $600 on a new Alpha.

 

Guys thanks for the different points of view. I will take both into consideration. Only reason I'm thinking of trading, was I put my unit up for sale and I got the offer. The other seller story is he is going away on business for a few months and need something powerful enough to take with(I'm #1 on Catzilla at 576p bench for AMD based cards:hi2: ). I love my laptop, has warranty till 2016 and runs everything that is thrown at it with ease. I really wish AMD would come out with a mobile solution as the 980M are $1k each, since there's no competition. For that type of $$$ I could replace the MB inside the desktop with the latest and greatest. Decisions, decisions.

 

I really want to see what the new AMD mobile GPUs will be like next year. They can't refresh their lineup anymore, the performance needs to be improved as well.

I'm hoping for AMD's R9 M390X to beat 980M easily and maybe i'll grab two of those for my clevo.

 

Crysis 3 is a nice example where hyperthreading can make a massive difference -- I'm talking up to 40% framerate increases.

 

Okay, firstly, why are you outright saying that the i5 4690k - one of the most popular CPUs out there for gaming rigs - is junk just because 'some people' care more than 'just playing games' without actually clarifying that the CPU is 'junk' only for certain tasks? For the vast majority of tasks, the 4690k performs identically to a 4790k at the same clock speeds. There are far fewer people out there that really care enough about number chasing to spend the extra on an i7, compared to the number of people interested in gaming performance.

Secondly, the Alpha does not present an acceptable gaming experience to enthusiasts that want high settings at 1080p or above. It's a great little machine for people that just want to 'play games', but then again, so are the Xbox One and PS4. That doesn't mean that either of those consoles are actually any good.

Mr. Fox, I absolutely get that you're a performance enthusiast and a number chaser. There's nothing wrong with that. That's great. I understand that nothing less than the best CPU available will satisfy you. That's also great. But please don't apply your own scenario to everyone else, going around and telling people that an i5 is 'junk' because it's not the best CPU for number chasing. That would be like me saying that any graphics card slower than a 980 is 'junk' just because I wouldn't be satisfied with anything less.

If what the OP cares about is gaming, I firmly stand by my suggestion that anything more than a 4690k is overkill, and I will stand by it until someone actually shows me benchmarks that prove otherwise in more than just one or two special cases.

I'd like to see some benchmarks for that. I spent a while searching Google and couldn't find any that show any statistically significant difference between an equivalently clocked 4-core i5 and i7. It might make a difference for a 2-core CPU, or at low resolutions and settings (where games are typically far more CPU-bound), but I'd like to see comparisons between more typical quad core gaming CPUs.

 

Battlefield 3 and 4 also take advantage of hyper-threading and more than six cores.

We're talking a 10-15% max increase in performance with ht though, I haven't seen a 40% increase just from ht.

 

I've seen hyperthreading make a significant difference for dual-core CPUs, but I haven't for anything more than that. Again, I'd really like to see benchmarks for it if anyone can provide some showing that hyperthreading makes a real difference.

 

You need to look at Crysis 3 benchmarks that run on v1.3 or later, because that's when full HT support was added. v1.3 came in out April 2013 so most benchmarks before that won't reflect upon the HT difference.

But here's a German benchmark showing a 40% increase in FPS going from i5-3570K to an i7-3770K.

 

Wow that's crazy. 18.2fps increase.

 

MaLDo Blog: HyperThreading and real custom graphics Tool

Spoiler

 

I stand partially corrected. I didn't expect it to make any difference at all, so it is a surprise to me that it does.

However, I find those German benchmark results to be quite flawed. They're benching it at 1280x720. Lower resolutions are often known to be more CPU bound, even if they are running it at higher details. Oh, and Das Germans are running the CPUs at different clock speeds.

The above does show a difference though. With that said, it's a static scene with no information besides a static frame rate. Before I'm convinced, I'd need to see a full benchmark run at a non-peasant resolution, including details of average and minimum FPSs and graphs of the frame timings. (I'm absolutely not saying that it's not possible but I do need to see a proper benchmark run before I'm convinced.)

And I'd still recommend an i5 over an i7 to people who don't have a lot of money to burn on their computers, as the only games that I can see any hints of performing better with HT on are the most recent Battlefield games plus Crysis 3. For people who don't have thousands to spend, that's not going to justify $100 extra for the CPU when that's $100 they can spend on a better GPU or on other things like an SSD, better case, better cooling etc.

 

There is a valid point to every angle. Truly low budget gaming calls for an 8 core AMD CPU clocked to 5GHz in order to match performance of that i5 running at 3.5-4.0GHz for a little less money than the i5. I used to do the build on a budget thing and I was never satisfied with the outcome. Now I just wait until I can afford something better that fits what I want instead of wasting money on something I will ultimately decide to replace because I was less than satisfied with the less expensive components.

But, there's more than one way to skin a cat. All that matters is the user/owner is happy with it. What we think is what we think. We've all expressed an opinion, and all are valid based on individual perspective. So, now it's up to ht_addict to decide what works best for him, based on what he wants out of it. He can trade and replace the mobo/CPU with something better as he indicated, or keep the M18xR2 and upgrade it. Either way, he will be spending more money if having a fire-breathing beast is the end goal. If it's not the goal, he can just start gaming and see how he likes it without spending anything.