Got a spare $43,000? You could spend it all on this monster PC

[DukeJukem]

43k for a 9700k? insult me more boy.

 

[DukeJukem]

"All it needs now is pairing with some $2000 Asus or Acer 4K/HDR/144Hz G-Sync monitors."

Those 2 companies should be sued for false advertising considering you can't even run 144hz 4k in 10 bit color mode lol. its either 144hz 8 bit +frc @ 4k or 96hz @ 4k with true 10 bit color. Which isn't what they advertise and not everyone spending 2 grand on these monitors know this.

 

[DukeJukem]

It would be cool to have this amount of power in a computer but there's no software that could actually take advantage of it.

Considering how many people there are making multiple-millions of dollars, it's surprising that this level of computer waste isn't more prevalent.

Games push it pretty close... Even dual titan RTX in SLI (NV Link) probably can't push Metro past 200FPS in 4k at ultra....

And the thing with these mega-beasts are that a $1500 PC is going to outperform it in 2 years...

Lol nvidia doesn't even support sli in raytracing or rtx themselves.

its called nvlink and it replaced sli

 

[USADadOverseas]

It needs to prove its worth by being able to play Crysis.

YES! Can it run Crysis on MAX settings and still get 60+ FPS? THAT's the real test.

 

[wiyosaya]

It would be cool to have this amount of power in a computer but there's no software that could actually take advantage of it.

Considering how many people there are making multiple-millions of dollars, it's surprising that this level of computer waste isn't more prevalent.

If its games, absolutely not!

However, there's CAD/CAE software that could push this to its limits especially finite element analysis running fluid dynamics, or very large mechanical models that have multiple parts running dynamical simulations. Many of these packages take advantage of CUDA, too, so even the graphics cards not involved in rendering would be used.

 

[toooooot]

I am surprised how being so useless, sli and crossfire haven't died years ago. They are like adding a power of a second car to your Ferrari but only when you go in reverse.

 

[captaincranky]

Well kidz, "will it run Crysis", is a very old meme. It sort of puts me in mind of the slightly sleazy souvenir T-shirt which says, "I'm a virgin, but this is a very old shirt".

Here are the recommended specs for the game:

Crysis Recommended Requirements

• CPU: Core 2 Duo 2.2 GHz/Athlon X2 4400+ or better
• CPU SPEED: Core 2 Duo 2.2 GHz/Athlon X2 4400+ or better
• RAM: 2 GB
• OS: Windows XP/Vista/7
• VIDEO CARD: Supported chipsets: NVIDIA GeForce 8800 GTS with 640MB RAM or similar.
• TOTAL VIDEO RAM: 640 MB
• 3D: Yes
• HARDWARE T&L: Yes
• PIXEL SHADER: 3.0
• VERTEX SHADER: 3.0
• DIRECTX VERSION: 9.0c (included)
• SOUND CARD: Yes
• FREE DISK SPACE: 12 GB
• DVD-ROM: 8X speed DVD-ROM. This game contains technology intended to prevent copying that may conflict with some DVD-ROM, DVD-RW and virtual drives.

Although I'm not a gamer, I'm sort of thinking my "lowly" i5-6600K / X170 / 24 GB RAM (tortoise slow 2133 "just enough speed to boot the damned thing" ) / 256 GB Evo SSD / and even the "bottleneck" GTX-1050 ti 4 GB ought to do the trick @ 1080p. No?

 

[FPSChris]

It needs to prove its worth by being able to play Crysis.

You'll get a screen notification, sic, "Of course I can run Crysis on high, but I won't do it, because it's beneath my dignity".

Runs Crysis in software mode @ 4k on ultra just for fun

 

[Someone8MyPosts]

Any ***** spending this much on a computer deserves what they get. First off, that's still nowhere close to $43k worth of equipment. Second, What the heck do you plan on using that much memory for? For typical use, you won't go above 8Gb, and for heavy use, you'll likely get somewhere below 16Gb. By heavy use, I mean you're doing video and/or 3d rendering and editing. Even for gaming, anything above 16Gb is pointless. Only a ridiculously inefficient game with insanely huge (think 8K) texture sizes would get close to the 16Gb ceiling. Going above 16Gb means you're only going to benefit from it being used as a server. Whatever you THINK you're doing with this, you clearly have no idea what you're doing. This has components thrown in for gaming, but some for server work, and some for general use, but combined...they're just a talking point. My guess is if you have $43k to waste on a computer, you're not the one doing any kind of work on it that requires those specs. This is not to mention the likelihood that at some point someone is going to have to reseat a card, or install a new part, so getting that done among all that pipework is going to cost even more time/money.

So, here's my advice. If you've got this kind of money to spend, think about what you want to do with a computer, and then pay someone far less than 1/2 that amount to build you a dual system to purpose.

 

[Squid Surprise]

Any ***** spending this much on a computer deserves what they get. First off, that's still nowhere close to $43k worth of equipment. Second, What the heck do you plan on using that much memory for? For typical use, you won't go above 8Gb, and for heavy use, you'll likely get somewhere below 16Gb. By heavy use, I mean you're doing video and/or 3d rendering and editing. Even for gaming, anything above 16Gb is pointless. Only a ridiculously inefficient game with insanely huge (think 8K) texture sizes would get close to the 16Gb ceiling. Going above 16Gb means you're only going to benefit from it being used as a server. Whatever you THINK you're doing with this, you clearly have no idea what you're doing. This has components thrown in for gaming, but some for server work, and some for general use, but combined...they're just a talking point. My guess is if you have $43k to waste on a computer, you're not the one doing any kind of work on it that requires those specs. This is not to mention the likelihood that at some point someone is going to have to reseat a card, or install a new part, so getting that done among all that pipework is going to cost even more time/money.

So, here's my advice. If you've got this kind of money to spend, think about what you want to do with a computer, and then pay someone far less than 1/2 that amount to build you a dual system to purpose.

While few people need 43k, there's no question that you DO get a pretty awesome PC for that amount of money.
And depending upon what you do - this computer is meant to be a workstation as well as a gaming rig (it's 2 systems, remember!). As a workstation, it can use as much RAM as you can put in. Adobe products, for one, can use crazy amounts of RAM if you let them. I've often loaded crazy amounts of images/videos into RAM where even 128gb can get used....

 

[That Dude There]

It would be cool to have this amount of power in a computer but there's no software that could actually take advantage of it.

Considering how many people there are making multiple-millions of dollars, it's surprising that this level of computer waste isn't more prevalent.

Games push it pretty close... Even dual titan RTX in SLI (NV Link) probably can't push Metro past 200FPS in 4k at ultra....

And the thing with these mega-beasts are that a $1500 PC is going to outperform it in 2 years...

Exactly why spending anything more than $5000 is a waste. Yeah I get it, the mega rich have money to burn. Who cares about the starving.

 

[Squid Surprise]

Exactly why spending anything more than $5000 is a waste. Yeah I get it, the mega rich have money to burn. Who cares about the starving.

Depends on what you need - and how much money you have...
If you’re a multi-millionaire, spending $43,000 is like us spending $43.... and while there are obviously diminishing returns, $43,000 DOES get you more than $5,000...