Latest resources

FreeCamera NascarMan32
A new, working camera editor for NR2003!
5.00 star(s) 1 ratings
Downloads
407
Updated
98 - Ford Performance Racing School Mustang - BRIS2 Hendrick9Fan
5.00 star(s) 2 ratings
Downloads
55
Updated
98 - Ford Performance Racing School Mustang - DAY3 Hendrick9Fan
5.00 star(s) 2 ratings
Downloads
46
Updated
98 - Ford Performance Racing School Mustang - KAN1 Hendrick9Fan
5.00 star(s) 2 ratings
Downloads
44
Updated
98 - Ford Performance Racing School Mustang - TEX1 Hendrick9Fan
5.00 star(s) 2 ratings
Downloads
39
Updated

Building A New Rig... Will This Cut It?

J.R.Franklin

Senior Member
SRD Member
Messages
792
Reaction score
1,833
It's time to finally say goodbye to my old reliable XP rig that I've had for the past 7 years. I'm having someone build me a new PC (as I don't know squat about this stuff) and these are the components we have picked out. Just wanted to get everyone's opinion on whether or not this will cut the mustard as they say. Obviously, I want this to run NR2003, but also want to set myself up for Heat Evolution, Forza, iRacing, Project Cars or any other more graphics demanding sims that may come down the line.

- Gigabyte GA-Z170XP-SLI mobo
- Intel I5-6500 CPU
- G.SKILL F4-2133C150-16GRR 16GB (2x8GB) DDR4-2133 memory
- HGST HDN724020ALE640 7K4000 2TB, SATA3, 6Gbps, 64MB cache disk
- Lite-on IHAS124-04 CD/DVD writer
- Windows 7 OEM key + download
- TBD: sata or M2 SSD (samsung) boot disk
- I'll be using my old case and power supply (450 watts)
- Asus VG248QE 24-inch Full HD Ergonomic Back-lit LED Gaming Monitor
I purposely left out a graphics card to see if the built-in graphics will do for now.

I'm open to all of your comments and other recommendations. Nothing above is cast in stone or has been ordered yet. I wanted to get your feedback first. Thanks for the help guys.
 

RacerXero84

Obnoxious old fart
SRD Member
Messages
3,912
Reaction score
5,085
Built in graphics will simply not cut it. And if you DO add a GPU, you will need a larger PSU to handle the watt requirements.

SSD is a life changer. I recommend at least a 256GB for the primary drive (OS drive), 512 if you can float it. While Samsung has amazing SSD's, I found the Mushkin series has fared well in the majority of the games you listed. Wife and I both use them. Leave the hard disk drive for storage or game installation overflow if you start getting below 50GB on the OS drive. Putting the OS on the SSD will make a difference, especially when you also install iRacing to that same drive.

Everything else looks like it'll fly, although I would venture to say if you are going with Windows 7, spring for Ultimate, it's much more streamlined giving you better overall performance.
 

Darren Ingram

Banned
Banned
Messages
2,547
Reaction score
2,012
Definitely get a GPU. Onboard graphics just will not do the rest of the system any justice and you won't be able to run any modern games on anything above ultra low settings.

You should be happy with your motherboard/CPU combo. I have a similar system for Haswell that I built a few years ago - Gigabyte GA-Z87X-D3H, and an Intel Core i5-4670K.
 

DaveO

Active Member
SRD Member
Messages
483
Reaction score
890
It's time to finally say goodbye to my old reliable XP rig that I've had for the past 7 years. I'm having someone build me a new PC (as I don't know squat about this stuff) and these are the components we have picked out. Just wanted to get everyone's opinion on whether or not this will cut the mustard as they say. Obviously, I want this to run NR2003, but also want to set myself up for Heat Evolution, Forza, iRacing, Project Cars or any other more graphics demanding sims that may come down the line.

- Gigabyte GA-Z170XP-SLI mobo
- Intel I5-6500 CPU
- G.SKILL F4-2133C150-16GRR 16GB (2x8GB) DDR4-2133 memory
- HGST HDN724020ALE640 7K4000 2TB, SATA3, 6Gbps, 64MB cache disk
- Lite-on IHAS124-04 CD/DVD writer
- Windows 7 OEM key + download
- TBD: sata or M2 SSD (samsung) boot disk
- I'll be using my old case and power supply (450 watts)
- Asus VG248QE 24-inch Full HD Ergonomic Back-lit LED Gaming Monitor
I purposely left out a graphics card to see if the built-in graphics will do for now.

I'm open to all of your comments and other recommendations. Nothing above is cast in stone or has been ordered yet. I wanted to get your feedback first. Thanks for the help guys.
JR, I highly recommend you get dual monitors for all the editing you do on tracks. I promise you won't regret it. I have 3 monitors, just for development, and I could never bring myself to go back to doing any type of modeling on just one monitor ever again. So treat yourself right bud. Also when you buy a case, make sure you have room for future upgrades. :)
 

TColeman12

Premier Senior Member
SRD Member
Messages
2,348
Reaction score
1,173
@J.R.Franklin
If you do end up looking at a GPU, I highly recommend the GTX 960. Works pretty well for me. If you plan on racing NR2003 at graphic intensive tracks, you should compress your cars so you don't have graphic problems. Compressing them got rid of all these weird shapes that would pop up in the cockpit view. I don't really have an opinion on Gigabyte mobos except mine broke the first day after I built it. Probably something dumb I did. :p

But yeah, everything else looks good. You'll love the SSD. I have the Kingston V300 120GB SATA III and I've had no problems at all. Of course, they also have SSDs with 240 GB, 480 GB, and 1 TB of storage.
Here's a link to the one I have. http://www.newegg.com/Product/Produ...042&cm_re=kingston_ssd-_-20-721-107-_-Product
I recommend a 240 GB or a 480 GB, as I've almost used mine up.
 
Last edited:

Demonspeed

Active Member
SRD Member
Messages
67
Reaction score
16
Might want a stronger power supply. Especially for a new build. 450 is OK and will probably work, but may not distribute proper power to all internal hardware parts. Currently mine PC which is a new build as of 4 months ago has a 750 watt power supply. Which was recommended by my I.T. friend who built it for me. Also running Windows 7
 

J.R.Franklin

Senior Member
SRD Member
Messages
792
Reaction score
1,833
Might want a stronger power supply. Especially for a new build. 450 is OK and will probably work, but may not distribute proper power to all internal hardware parts. Currently mine PC which is a new build as of 4 months ago has a 750 watt power supply. Which was recommended by my I.T. friend who built it for me. Also running Windows 7
I looked and my old PSU is actually 550 watts rather than the 450 I posted above. However, I will probably take the suggestion above and get a 750 watt PSU as I will likely be adding an NVidia 1000 series video card and the 750 will give me some more head room.
 

J.R.Franklin

Senior Member
SRD Member
Messages
792
Reaction score
1,833
Greatly appreciate all of the feedback, comments and suggestions fellas.

Now let me ask you "wiz kids" in here another question... should I consider going with Windows 10 rather than 7? Does W10 work well for everyone? And would I realize a little more "bump" in performance with 10 over 7?
 

RacerXero84

Obnoxious old fart
SRD Member
Messages
3,912
Reaction score
5,085
That really depends. I can get my 7 Ultimate to run better with identical specs as my wife's PC, which now has 10 (she played the role of test subject). Not a fan of 10 overall, the resources used is higher than 7 Ultimate.

There are other concerns, but the big key is legacy support: Windows 7 Ultimate has it, Windows 10 will not play some of my older games, which is infuriating. But it add some nice little eye candy features and support for Direct X 12 (which only a handful of games really take advantage of).

Overall, there's a reason Windows 7 Ultimate costs as much or more than 10....
 

TColeman12

Premier Senior Member
SRD Member
Messages
2,348
Reaction score
1,173
Greatly appreciate all of the feedback, comments and suggestions fellas.

Now let me ask you "wiz kids" in here another question... should I consider going with Windows 10 rather than 7? Does W10 work well for everyone? And would I realize a little more "bump" in performance with 10 over 7?
Edit: I agree with @RacerXero84. It depends.
In my experiences, Windows 10 wil will be a bit faster, but in my opinion, Windows 7 is more optimized for NR2003 programs. (CCM, Camhack)
 

Darren Ingram

Banned
Banned
Messages
2,547
Reaction score
2,012
I can say in the 7 vs 10 thing, I get just slightly better performance (about a 2-3 FPS boost) in 10, but nothing you can really notice. Overall it's really just a personal preference. Just note, 10 will be supported longer than 7 will, even though 7 support doesn't end until 2020.
 

J.R.Franklin

Senior Member
SRD Member
Messages
792
Reaction score
1,833
That really depends. I can get my 7 Ultimate to run better with identical specs as my wife's PC, which now has 10 (she played the role of test subject). Not a fan of 10 overall, the resources used is higher than 7 Ultimate.

There are other concerns, but the big key is legacy support: Windows 7 Ultimate has it, Windows 10 will not play some of my older games, which is infuriating. But it add some nice little eye candy features and support for Direct X 12 (which only a handful of games really take advantage of).

Overall, there's a reason Windows 7 Ultimate costs as much or more than 10....
What are the advantages of Windows 7 Ultimate over Windows 7 Pro? Is Ultimate really worth it over Pro?
 

RacerXero84

Obnoxious old fart
SRD Member
Messages
3,912
Reaction score
5,085
Simplification. The real key between the two is simplification. Ultimate has minimal "extra" processes and accessories that run by default. I've messed with every version of 7, and found Ultimate to be exactly what the name implies. It took the least amount of configuring to get it running optimally (an barely more effort to run better than stock Windows 10 Pro).

The greatest setback to any version of Windows 7 aside from ultimate has been the number of processes that it runs by default, some of which can be stopped, some require that the user stops it each time the computer is booted, which is a real hassle. Prime example would be "sidebar.exe". Even though I ran no widgets, that processes always ran upon boot, and I would (along with others) have to close it down each time, and, despite the fact that I did NOT run any widgets, it drained a decent amount of resources, most notably in RAM.

While the normal comparisons are some of the bundled abilities that it has (like Bitlocker, etc etc), from a purist performance point of view, the power of Ultimate lies in its simplicity. It reminded me of Windows 98 SE in that regard, an OS that I would streamline to take maximum advantage of hardware, and not have the OS be anything of a burden.

I would never go back to another version, and Microsoft, even dangling a "free" upgrade to 10, Cortana, and DX12 could not make me move. I can honestly say, that of all versions of Windows I've encountered since 3.1, this is by far the happiest I've ever been with an OS, with 2000/ME/Vista/8/8.1/10 being my least favorite in order based on the performance abilities of the OS itself.
 

Mystical

Always 110%
SRD Member
Messages
4,194
Reaction score
6,626
My 2013 build has windows 7 ultimate and my new pc uses windows 10. I've had no issues on my new machine with windows 10 or any of the tools/programs I use for NR2003. As a bonus for really old stuff that only worked on like widows XP you can use a program like virtual box to run windows XP on your windows 10 system. I use this a lot of older NR2003 stuff that stopped working even on windows 7.

Also, I saw you mentioned games like Forza, if you are talking about the new forza pc version I believe that requires windows 10 to work.
 

RacerXero84

Obnoxious old fart
SRD Member
Messages
3,912
Reaction score
5,085
Correct. It requires DX12, which, as I referenced in the NASCAR Heat Evolution thread, could easily be the games undoing should it be built on DX12 rather than optimized for it, the latter thereby allowing it to run on other OS's that do not have DX12. Never understood why they didn't allow for DX12 support on 7 other than one of their great many (arguably) underhanded methods at forcing users to upgrade to the platform. As the case in iRacing, quite a number of my friends were 'snookered' into Windows 10, and grudgingly gave it a whirl before opting to roll back that update and go back to Windows 7.

As for VirtualBox, that has always been a tool, regardless the OS, however, I found that with Windows 7, I could manage to get older games/programs to work without the presence of VB (and before the rise of Good Old Games), whereas on my wife's PC, that has Windows 10 installed, it requires VB because of a lack of legacy support that Microsoft itself has acknowledged since the first iteration. VB, while a great program/tool, is simply too much of a hassle IMO, rather than allowing the user to simple run a program.

To a point, it does come down to preference, however, like I stated before, I see little to no reason to upgrade to Windows 10, nor any significant reason to recommend it over W7 Ultimate.
 

RacerXero84

Obnoxious old fart
SRD Member
Messages
3,912
Reaction score
5,085
As far as a GPU goes, DO NOT get a GTX970. 960 or 980 is fine, but the architecture of the 970 can really mess you up on some games, including nr2003.
YES. Good point made here that I think gets downplayed FAR too much; the 970 is a crapshoot at best, I've known about (or directly known people) that have had a wide range of issues surrounding that particular GPU. Avoid it at all costs.
 

J.R.Franklin

Senior Member
SRD Member
Messages
792
Reaction score
1,833
Thanks for the heads up on the 970, guys. That was a card I was leaning towards. Now I'm looking at a GTX 1070.
 

RacerXero84

Obnoxious old fart
SRD Member
Messages
3,912
Reaction score
5,085
The 1000-series are built on new architecture. I especially like that they incorporated anti-warp rendering (something you notice mostly in VR or on triple screens in iRacing: the image stretches, making depth perception difficult)
 

Alan Harkleroad

SRD Site Administrator
Staff member
Admin
Messages
5,856
Reaction score
5,984
Thanks for the heads up on the 970, guys. That was a card I was leaning towards. Now I'm looking at a GTX 1070.
I have an R9 390 Gigatbyte G1, very nice card and budget minded at $259. I did just order a EVGA 1070 GTX FTW though that will be here next week. So my R9 390 is for sale.

If you are watching your money AMD gives you a lot per dollar. If you are performance over cost. Its like the Intel vs. AMD argument. Power vs. Cost friendliness.

So if you dont care about cost NVIDIA 980 GTX or 1070/1080. If you are trying to save some money but want middle of the road cost with pretty good performance then look at the AMD R9 390's or the new RX480.
 
Top