Phatkat

iTrader: (14)

I'm relaxed, just pointing out some things.

oXYnary

iTrader: (4)

Hey Captain since you work with photos. Do you use a IPS monitor (the cheaper sub 1000 versions)?

I was planning a dual monitor setup. Buying two matching or using old 19" with a newer one as main. Keep tools in the older.

Bigshades

iTrader: (23)

Same here! except only to 4.0

Cpt.America

iTrader: (52)

Nope... I have no need. I take tens of thousands of photos a year, and process them all on a calibrated newegg purchased 22" viewsonic monitor. a 20" viewsonic (identical vertical resolution) is used as my secondary, and holds all my tool pallets.

I get 100% perfect matching results printed from my prolab. There is just no need for a special monitor for doing photo editing. Anybody who thinks so, likes snake oil

oXYnary

iTrader: (4)

Hmm there seems to a consensus at other forums about the IPS having better color and ability to have a wider view angle. I have a viewsonic now and its ok but the darks especially can sometimes get a tad posterized.

I also have updated the list all. Please take a look. Threw out the AMD.

http://secure.newegg.com/WishList/Pu...umber=12289891

Still unsure of going micro or standard atx.

Decided on a Geforce 460 as a placement for now until get specs on Radeon 6000 series. 1 Option is a slightly OC one with I believe is a ok cooler. The other has 2gb of memory but from all accounts not so great a cooler. Not so much for Overclocking am I worried about. But heat. 2Gb is better for larger HD resolutions in games.

Phatkat

iTrader: (14)

Might as well do ATX, you just may need the extra slots, and for a few bucks difference.

Cpt.America

iTrader: (52)

I certainly won't argue that they aren't better... But necessary? nope... 0% necessary. Here, I will try to explain a couple of real world examples that I experience:

1. better color

I don't do color manipulation. I am a photographer, not a graphic designer. The colors I get, which are basically the colors I want, are determined and captured by a) my lens, and b) my camera.

EXACT shades of what color aren't super important to me. Overall luminence and saturations of some colors ARE important, but that detail doesn't REALLY require anything special as far as viewing it on the monitor. Even so... I get GREAT color match from my camera, to my lab, to paper, without touching color.

2. better viewing angle

Certainly, but I know that going into it. I have to sit square in front of my monitor to get it to look right. What REALLY matters, is when I am done and happy with a digital image... and then I get one sent to me on print from my lab... does it look exactly like it did when I was working on it? Colors look good? Saturation levels look good? Contrast look the same? etc... 99.99% of the time, I get a PERFECT match to both the vision in my head, and what I have on screen, as long as the lab doesnt' touch the colors or levels when they print.

so sure.. a larger viwing angle would be better... but will it give me better prints? Not at all.

3. I haven't noticed any issues with the blacks on my screen. I first calibrate using either my spider, or adobe gamma.... then, I self/eye calibrate using contrast/levels with a black to white gradient, in photoshop. A true white to black gradient is the best way to make sure you get proper brightness and contrast levels with your monitor... and your eye will do a better job than a calibrater will.

oXYnary

iTrader: (4)

Its not the money. I like the idea of a smaller box/less footprint. Might make it easier to get to lans.

Any suggestions or issues about liquid cooling? The less fans I have to use. The quieter.

Phatkat

iTrader: (14)

Water, eh? I won't do it any other way.

You may end up having to use a bigger case due to the WC setup. What do you want to WC? All of it?

helibrian

I read an article recently (mighta been tom's hardware) where they were approaching 5GHZ on an i5 without liquid. I think they were using a noctua cooler on it. All this talk is kinda making me wanna get off my lazy @$$ and update my bios.

Phatkat

iTrader: (14)

The DH-14 is the only aircooler that comes close to water, it is a beast. But, a well thought out water setup will still beat it, though at higher cost. I also just like that most people are dumbfounded at my PC having water in it. And antifreeze.

Bigshades

iTrader: (23)

If you're concerned about moving the computer around, I think you should stay with air-cooling. There are many great heat sinks available, I use the hyper 212. I'm stable at 4.0 with it.

moving a water cooled machine is a headache from what I hear, something about draining the system, transporting, and then refilling.

Phatkat

iTrader: (14)

No need to drain it, but it will be heavier. I have a 3x120 radiator, a 1-bay reservoir, and all the requisite fans and a pump, along with the electronics, it's a heavy bastard.

I don't go to LAN's, so no worries, but moving it for cleaning, sucks.

Oxy, if you are gonna LAN, then I think you should stay with aircooling.

oXYnary

iTrader: (4)

Well it more like I dream of going to LANs again. Kinda hard without a car though.

If you look at my list of products I have a water cooler for the cpu. Didn't know if that was a good one or not.


heli. If you think just updating your bios is a pain.. Try %^&( modding it without bricking your computer and getting the results your after.

http://www.bios-mods.com/forum/Threa...Updates?page=3

Phatkat

iTrader: (14)

I don't think it's bad, but the Corsair H70 is the newer refresh of the H50, and everyone that has an H50 loves it, so I can't see how the H70 would be worse. A few more dollars, but worth it. Unless you wanna cool everything, in which case I can work up a list for you, see what works best for your needs and wants.