Cases and PSUs - New Recommendations!

12-25-2012:  A lot of this information is taken directly from the previous post on the subject, but I feel like there's enough new information to justify a new post.

Choosing a case and PSU for your new PC build is often something of an afterthought. It's easy to make the mistake of focusing in hard on your sweet, sweet CPU and GPU purchases, buying the best performing components you can afford, then sticking them in whatever case you can buy with what's left of your budget, along with the cheapest PSU you could find that would (supposedly) power your build.

The reality is that Cases and PSUs are, in a way, the most important part of any PC build. A case with poor cooling performance might result in long term (or, in extreme cases, even short-term) damage to your components. The harder it is to build in your case, the more likely you are to accidentally damage the case, your components, or yourself (the cheaper the case, the sharper the edges) trying to force things. And if the case was hard to build in, it won't be easy to upgrade components in, or clean. Keep in mind that a great case is an investment. Unlike a processor or graphics card, which can go from cream of the crop to just 2nd (or 3rd) best in the time it takes to get it shipped to your door, your case can be around for a long time, and be home to many upgrades and new builds, as long as you buy a solid model that gives you room to grow. It's worth the extra expense. A PSU is even more significant. A quality, enthusiast grade PSU is a solid, efficient, purpose built piece of electronics, and if you keep things reasonable, it will serve you well through upgrades, and even new builds. A quality PSU can do all you ask of it and more, and while you shouldn't go crazy, you'd be surprised by what a nice Seasonic or Corsair or Antec (etc.) can do for you. Of course, if you choose poorly, you could turn your multi-hundred dollar PC build into a paperweight fashioned of smoldering silicon trapped within sheet metal.

Below you'll find information and guidelines on Case and PSU choice, as well as some recommendations on what might be a good buy for your budget.

Cases

When looking at cases, I recommend looking for the following features as a baseline:

1. Cable Management - At this point, reasonable cable management features are so common in cases at all budget levels that there really isn't any reason to buy a case without them. Sometimes the case will have a large void on the right side of the motherboard tray (many older Cooler Master cases like the CM Storm Sniper use this method), others will have cutouts (sometimes with rubber grommets) to bring cables back through. Ideally the case will feature a cutout for your 8 pin CPU power cable as well, but some cheaper cases with cable management don't have them. If you're lucky and careful, you might be able to thread your 8 pin under your motherboard and through the CPU backplate cutout to mimic the effect. Regardless of the style or number/location of cutouts offered, the basic idea is always the same, moving cables behind the motherboard tray as much as possible and bringing them out right where they need to be. Cable management doesn't just make your case innards look pretty, it helps your case stay cool.

2. Bottom-mounted PSU w/ Vent - Once again, this feature is very common on quality cases of all budget levels, so you shouldn't have any trouble finding something you like. Basically this feature improves case layout by placing your PSU at the bottom of the case, where it can intake cool air from under the case and exhaust it. It largely removes your PSU from the thermal equation. It's nice if the vent is filtered.

3. Good Thermal Options - At the very least your case should have mounts for a front intake fan, and a rear exhaust fan. These should be at least 120mm fan mounts. Ideally you'll have options side intake and top exhaust fans as well (2 fan mounts for each location is fairly standard in a good enthusiast level case). If you have multiple front intake fans (or a single larger, say, 200mm fan) the side intake is less important. Filtered intakes are a plus.

4. General Good Design - I always look for a few additional good design decisions in a case. A good case should feature at least some tool-less/screwless options for hardware mounting. Understandably, tool-less mechanisms are less numerous the lower the price of the case, but the best budget options still often feature thumbscrews, and/or a single tool-less mount on the 5.25 bays. The HDD cages should be oriented to place the "back" of the drive, where your SATA and Power connectors are, toward the side of the case with the motherboard tray, to facilitate cable routing. Keep an eye out for a nice sized CPU backplate cutout, it'll make attaching an aftermarket cooler immeasurably easier. Finally, most cases worth your time will have at least 2 front panel USB 2.0 ports to go with the HD audio hookups.

Naturally, these baselines can't cover everything, depending on your budget or intended usage (HTPC cases are usually pretty short on cable routing possibilities, for example) you might find that some of those features aren't necessary to you. But, for a standard tower for the computer enthusiast and/or gamer, that's the stuff you want.

After you've taken a look at what's available and eliminated those cases that just don't make the cut, buy within your budget, and keep aesthetics under consideration. You'll be less inclined to take care of something you can barely stand to look at. There are a number of unique touches and additions that can increase the value of the case for your particular build, so be thorough and make sure you've found something you can live with. If you're having trouble figuring out where to start, check the list below for some good starting points at various budget levels.

~$40:  NZXT Source 210 - There are several options for cases at around this price level but frankly none of them really float my boat.  In the dim and distant past NZXT sold a pair of well-equipped but bare-bones cases (the NZXT Gamma and Beta Evo) for around $40 which I would normally recommend here.  Their replacement, the Source 210, looks more staid, and is at least (if not more) functional in terms of fan setups, but has HDD orientation issues and, weirdly, I miss the funky styling of the Gamma and Beta Evo.

~$60:  Cooler Master HAF 912 - Let's be real for a minute: there are definitely better looking cases to be had for $60.  I'm of the opinion, though, that there aren't any *better* cases for $60.  Yes, the front is chunky, plasticy and flared.  Yes, the unpainted steel interior is blah at best, ugly at worst.  But look past that and you'll find a spacious case with good cable routing features, removeable drive cages, and a small cage just for 2.5'' drives.  The included fan setup is basic but competent with included front and rear 120mm fans.  Fully loaded the case will allow for one of Cooler Master's honking 230mm fans up front, or dual 120mm fans, ditto for the top.  There's also room for a single 120mm fan on the side if your video card really needs some fresh air.

~$80:  Cooler Master Storm Enforcer - The Storm Enforcer is basically just a HAF 912 with a black interior, covered 5.25'' bays, and a different weird plasticy protrusion on the front.  Aside from the obvious aesthetic differences, the case includes a superior default fan setup (230mm fans at the top and front, 120mm at rear).  Once again, if you can deal with the looks, you're getting a great case with what I would definitely say are $20 worth of extras over its more basic cousin.

~$100:  Corsair 400R - Corsair has engineered some of the best case interiors around.  This one isn't much different, with great cable routing features, plenty of room, and loads of (unfortunately unremovable) 3.5'' drive bays.  The default fan setup is solid (2x120mm up front and 1x120mm in the back) with lots of space to grow (2x120mm up top, 2x120mm on the side, 2x120mm on the other side of the drive cages).  It even comes with additional extras like a built in fan controller.

~$120:  Fractal Design Define R4 - The R4 is the bigger, better successor to the already well-liked Define R3.  Like the R3, the R4 is designed for quiet operation, with built in noise-deadening foam and use of quiet 140mm fans.  It's not much taller than its predecessor, but it is wider, which helps make up for the room that the foam takes up and makes cable routing easier.  Some small irritants from the R3 (the loose grommets in the cable routing cutouts, for example) have been resolved, and there's a new fan controller up front.  Additional features include loads of fan ports (2x140mm up front, same up top, 1x140mm in the back, 1x140mm on the bottom, 1x140mm on the side) as well as removable 3.5'' drive cages and a pair of 2.5'' drive mounts on the back of the motherboard tray.

~$140:  Cooler Master HAF XM - The Cooler Master HAF XM is one hell of a mid tower.  It comes with 230mm fans up front and up top, with a 120mm fan in the back.  There are 2 3.5'' hot-swap bays accessible from the front of the case, below the 5.25'' bays.  Inside there are removable 3.5'' drive cages, along with tons of internal space, grommeted cable cutouts, and a 2.5'' drive tray on the back of the motherboard tray, which is pretty cool.

Can you spend more money?  Absolutely.  There are some pretty spectactular cases available, from high end aluminum cases, to completely custom jobs.  The real question is whether or not your *should* spend more.  Most people don't need the space offered by a really big, expensive case, so the answer to that question is generally "no," but if you're looking at a custom water cooling loop, or something even more insane, you'll be looking to spend more than is reasonable.  Drop by the thread to let us know what you're planning and we'll see if we can help.

Power Supplies

Buying a power supply is a crucial decision, and it doesn't respond well to the kind of "pop it in our test rig and benchmark it" style of reviewing that most PC component review sites tend to favor. In many cases, a power supply that runs a test rig just fine can be less efficient than advertised, unable to pull its rated peak wattage, and have out of specification electrical ripple and noise that can damage your components. Fewer sites than you'd think actually test power supplies correctly, below are 3 of my favorites:

johnnyGuru
[H]ardOCP
Hardware Secrets

All of these sites are very transparent about their methodology, which is good because I've found that legitimate power supply reviews are very important in determing the correct supply to buy. For example, reviews might help you find out that while some Antec PSU lines are very solid (True Power New, original Earthwatts below 650W), others are mediocre to terrible (new Earthwatts, original Earthwatts from 650W and up, Basiq). This hodgepodge of awesome, acceptable, and awful product lines occurs largely because most major PSU vendors sell PSU lines that are rebadged (and sometimes modified) power supplies from other companies (Seasonic, CWT, and many others). So, while one line might benefit by being based on a solid Seasonic platform, another might be crippled by being based on a (literally) explosive Huntkey PSU. Because you don't have time to deconstruct a boatload of power supplies, your best option is to let good, reputable reviewers do the legwork for you.

So, you have some good resources that will let you know what to look for, but when you find it, you find that it has 2 12V rails, and your good buddy told you that quality PSUs should only have a single 12V rail. Or, it's modular, and that same buddy told you all about how that's bad and not as good as hardwired cables.

Your buddy is an idiot.

Apologies for my bluntness, but there are numerous myths/semi-myths that you hear all the time about PSUs that can really interfere with the buying process. Let's take a look at some “conventional wisdom” that is simply incorrect:

• Modular cabling increases resistance/is another point of failure/is at increased risk for corrosion: The first and second points are technically true, but in the first case, the added resistance is entirely negligible, it's roughly equivalent to a few additional inches of cabling. Modular cables are, in theory, at slightly increased risk for failure, but the risk is very slim in a quality supply, and if you use PSU cable extensions (for example) you're essentially assuming the same risk, just slightly further down the cable. The third claim is just untrue. Modular cabling, either in fully or partially modular supplies, is really helpful in maintaining a clean build. It's a nice feature to have that usually comes at a price premium. Don't spend loads of additional money on it, but it is worth a reasonable amount of cash to have on a quality supply.

• Single Rail/Multi Rail designs are superior to Multi Rail/Single Rail designs: The objections here are slightly different. Single rail designs get boosted by many because of issues multi-rail supplies had 4-5 years ago with load balancing. Since then, design has improved and those problems are a thing of the past (at least in quality supplies). Multi-rail supplies are “superior” because Single-Rail supplies above a certain wattage (around 600W) have OCP (over current protection) that is set so high out of necessity (because all of the current on the 12V rail is on a single rail) that it's likely that, in the event of a short circuit that the SCP (Short Circuit Protection) doesn't catch, you'll sustain serious to catastrophic component damage before the OCP kicks in. Now, it's really unlikely that such a short circuit would occur, so really Multi-Rail vs. Single-Rail is a non-issue, but if you really want the absolute safest supply and you need more than 600ish Watts, go with a quality Multi-Rail unit.

• Headroom! More Headroom!: Okay, so often I'm the first person to buy more than I need, but a quality PSU is a well-designed, precision engineered, ass-kicking beast with as many safety precautions built in as the manufacturer can fit onto a PCB.  Buy enough PSU to run your PC at full bore and no more.  You'll hardly ever use that much PSU, and you'll be burning money in electricity bills if you buy a PSU where your normal usage doesn't fall roughly in the area where the PSU is most efficient.

So with all that said, here's a few manufacturer recommendations/warnings to keep in mind as you buy your PSU:

The Good

Corsair – Corsair has made something of a name for itself in the PSU sector, and they do make some of the better PSUs available today (their AX series, mostly). Many of their older lines are still favorites among enthusiasts, though other companies have come out with competing/superior lines. Still, those are completely solid supplies, even if they aren't the best performers anymore. With the exception of the current “Builder Series” (PSUs labeled CX430, CX500, CX600, which are labeled at higher wattages than they probably should be), and the new Gamer Series (which are solid, but probably overpriced, and mostly exist to be sold at brick and mortar outlets like Best Buy) I would recommend a Corsair supply without hesitation.

Seasonic – Seasonic makes some of the best PSUs in the world, including most of the best PSUs in the world from vendors like Corsair and Antec. You see, Seasonic is both an OEM vendor, and a Retail vendor. Most of their retail supplies are clustered around lower wattages, usually under 650W, but they make high quality, efficient supplies.

Superflower - Superflower doesn't actually make PSUs for the retail market in the US.  This is a shame, because they have a new 80+ Platinum platform coming out, and their 80+ Gold platform, the aptly named "Golden Green," was brilliant, with strong performance and unusually good scaling.  Fortunately for American consumers, multiple companies have rebadged Golden Green PSUs for sale in America, including NZXT's Hale90 series, Rosewill's Lightning series, and Kingwin's Lazer Gold units.

Silverstone - As far as I know, Silverstone is the only company that retails a good selection of SFX PSUs.  They're even releasing an 80+ gold version of their 450W SFX unit that is fully modular.  Silversone also makes a range of standard ATX PSUs, many of which are fully modular.  Silverstone usually uses Enhance as their OEM.

Antec – Despite my continued dislike of Antec's Basiq series of PSUs, I've come to the conclusion that Antec is doing much more right than wrong in the PSU market these days. The True Power New line (which appears to be EOLed) is great, as are the True Power Quattro units. The Antec Neo Eco units are really solid Seasonic-based units that are absolutely perfect for budget-conscious builders. The Antec High Current Gamer supplies are, at least at most wattages, built on the Seasonic S12II Bronze platform, so they're also a great budget-friendly choice. Antec also makes one of the best 1200W supplies available, the 1200W High Current Pro. The Earthwatts line is an adequate budget-friendly line of PSUs. I wouldn't use their higher wattage units in a higher-end build, but their low-wattage units are reliable, even if their performance won't wow you.

The Mediocre

Thermaltake – Thermaltake pretty much averages out to mediocre. Their Toughpower and Toughpower XT lines are both solid, if generally overpriced. Their other lines, though, like their TR2 supplies, are generally terrible, with a few thoroughly mediocre units in the mix.

Rosewill - Rosewill has some truly horrid crud, but also has some solid units, and some great units. In particular, their Gold-certified Lightning units are OEM'd by Superflower using their fantastic "Golden Green" platform, and are really solid values with some high voltage options for those who need them.

NZXT - These guys have recently stepped up to the plate with some seriously nice supplies. They have some more "budget-friendly" PSUs OEM'd by Seasonic, and their Hale90 series of PSUs is OEM'd by Superflower, and is a great platform.  Unfortunately some of their more recent "budget" focused supplies have been revealing some issues, despite coming from such a reliable OEM.

OCZ - OCZ has been in the PSU game for a while now, and the good news is that you could definitely do worse.  The bad news is that you could also do better.  Some of OCZ's supplies (the Fatal1ty 750W unit and most of the ModXStream units, for example) are somewhat overrated, at least when looking at their 12V ratings.  They do make a wide range of units, including some fully modular 80+ Bronze models, and higher end 80+ Gold ones as well, but you can often find better performing units at similar price points.

The Bad

Cooler Master – It's surprising, in a way, that a company that makes some really great cases also makes some exceptionally terrible PSUs. Out of all the power supplies that Cooler Master has in their lineup, only the Silent Pro M is really worth your time, and even those supplies aren't particularly good values. Aside from the 4 supplies in that line, avoid like the plague.

Ultra Products – Ultra has had a fairly tarnished reputation for a while, and has made some steps toward redemption recently, but between their fairly frivolous lawsuit regarding modular PSUs, and some recent incidences of them falsely claiming SLI certification, it's really hard to label them as anything other than a cruddy company.

Raidmax - I don't think I've ever met a Raidmax PSU I didn't hate.  They have a distressing tendency toward taking old, obsolete designs, adding enough modern touches to get by (fancy lights! PCI-E power leads!) then overrating their wattage at unreasonable temperatures and labelling them deceptively.  They're basically used car dealers, but for PSUs.

Diablotek - I don't know who makes the insides of these PSUs, but if I find out the authorities should probably be notified.  Any company making PSUs like this is either incompetent or evil.  If the former, they're a danger to themselves and others, stupidity like that will get someone killed.  If the latter, I guarantee you they're also war criminals.

Generics – God help me, don't use the power supply that came with your case.

As for specific purchasing recommendations...well it's hard to say. PSU choice is heavily dependent on what particular wattage, feature set, and connector demands you have. Buy a good supply from a good company, and be prepared to spend at least 50 to 60 bucks, even if you're looking at something in the 500W range. It sucks to spend money, but this is one of those instances where you will pay significantly more later if you try to save 20 bucks now.

Graphics: The Ever-War Continues!

For most systems, graphics hardware is the star of the show.  Sure, you need a processor and RAM, but that's all integers and floating points and blah, blah, blah, booooring.  For the purposes of gaming, the rest of your system is mainly an effort to get out of your video card's way.  The price of a solid video card reflects that; for gaming PCs the video card will be the most expensive single component you purchase.

Because the video card is so important to the performance of a gaming PC, and because you'll be spending a healthy chunk of change on one, you need to know what you're looking at.  The consumer graphics market is (for the moment) a continuous competition between AMD and NVIDIA.  Both of these companies design cards and create drivers and other software, then license this to other vendors who actually assemble and sell cards to consumers.  These vendors tend to produce at least 1 model each of the various card designs, and often more due to having factory overclocked versions, and/or versions with "non-reference" (that is, different from the standard design supplied by AMD/NVIDIA) coolers.  It's easy to get confused by all the different models, and having multiple vendors and versions of each card doesn't help.  Below I've included a basic breakdown of the models currently on offer from each company.

AMD Radeon HD Cards

• Current Generation: 7000 Series Cards
• 7900 Series: Best Enthusiast performance.  Preferred for multi-monitor setups and/or high resolution monitors (~1440p).
• 7800 Series: Strong Enthusiast performance, but significantly more affordable, excellent for full HD (1080p) resolution and similar.
• 7700 Series: Basic Enthusiast performance, powerful enough to provide acceptable FPS with lowered detail at 1080p, with stronger performance at 1680x1050 and other comparable/lower resolutions.
• At the moment, there aren't any lower-end 7000-series cards available for retail.  It may be possible to find one, but they would be resold OEM cards, so support would be limited, if not non-existent.

Nvidia GeForce Cards

• Current Generation: 600 Series Cards
• GTX 680: Best Enthusiast performance.  Preferred for multi-monitor setups and/or high resolution monitors(~1440p).
• GTX 670: Best Enthusiast performance.  Slightly lower performing than the GTX 680, but still excellent for multi-monitor setups and/or high resolution monitors.
• GTX 660 Ti: Strong Enthusiast performance.  Excellent performance at or around full HD (1080p).
• GTX 660: Strong Enthusiast performance.  Similar in performance and price to the Radeon HD 7870.
• GTX 650 Ti: Basic Enthusiast performance.  Stronger performance than Radeon HD 7770, but lower than Radeon HD 7850.  Acceptable performance at 1080p.
• GTX 650: Basic Enthusiast performance.  Stronger performance than Radeon HD 7750, but lower than Radeon HD 7770.  Acceptable performance at 1080p.
• GT 640: Strong general performance.  Acceptable budget gaming performance at low resolutions, strong performance in general applications and media playback.
• GT 630: Good general performance.  Unimpressive gaming performance, good performance in productivity applications and media playback.  Preferred for for media playing (Home Theater PC) and slim PC applications due to availability of passive and/or low profile versions of these cards.  Multiple versions of this card exist, based on differing architectures, with differing memory configurations.
• There are some lower end cards available, but for the most part I'd say those cards aren't worth your time unless you wanted to keep a backup/testing video card for trouble-shooting purposes, or need a passive or near-passive card that can support multiple monitors (maybe in an office environment) and you anticipate little to no demands being made of it.

This is an exciting generation of video cards.  Nvidia has reversed, in commanding fashion, a somewhat distressing trend toward hotter, more power hungry GPUs.  Kepler (their new architecture) is very efficient, along with being extremely powerful.  AMD is staying in the game as well, much like a few years ago, when the 5000 series cards were so well regarded, the 7000 series cards are competitive both from a price and performance perspective, along with continuing AMD's recent efforts of keeping heat and electricity usage at reasonable levels.

Below are some individual recommendations:

Extremely high end:  If you have a 1440p monitor, you'll need muscle to drive it.  The GTX 670 and Radeon 7970 (non-GHZ version) strike the right balance between price and performance.  Both have the large amounts of VRAM and pixel-pushing muscle necessary to drive your games at 2560x1440.

High end:  Most people game at or around 1080p (1920x1200 isn't as common as 1080p, but it's still out there) and the best cards for this come in at around $300, the Radeon 7950 and the GTX 660 Ti.  Both should give you eye candy to spare at 1080p.

Mid-Range:  As I said, most people game at or around 1080p.  Most people also don't want to spend $300 on a video card.  Fortunately, great performance at these resolutions can be bought for less.  The GTX 660 and Radeon 7870 are great cards that often retail for close to $200.

Low end:  The economy being what it is, who wants to spend 2 Benjamins on a video card?  For people with lower resolution monitors, or who are willing to turn down the detail settings a bit, there are still great cards to be had for less than $200.  Prices on the Radeon 7850 are plummeting, some are available for around $175, a spectacular value (in my opinion).  If you're looking to spend less, the GTX 650 Ti is probably now your best option

Generally speaking, most people won't need to spend more than $300 for great performance, because most people game at 1080p.  People with 1440p monitors will be well served by the cards recommended above, but may have to compromise a bit on detail settings in some games (1440p is so many pixels).  If you have a high resolution monitor, or are interested in a multi-monitor setup, you may want more horsepower than is accounted for above.  If so, drop by the thread and we'll see what we can do for you.

HDDs and SSDs: Step 1 - SSD, Step 2 - Profit

Oh how times have changed.  The last time I wrote a big storage post like this, HDD prices were so low I was buying Samsung Spinpoints to use as paperweights.  All it took was a little rain in Thailand and suddenly you could trade a 2TB HDD for ownership of an actual human being.  Things have settled down significantly since then, but the rise in mechanical drive prices, coupled with a steep decline in the price of SSDs, has really altered the buying equation.

Hard Disk Drives:  Expensive, but Still Necessary.

There's just no getting around the fact that, even on sale, most HDDs are at least $20 more expensive than they were before the floods in Thailand.  They aren't as excessively expensive as they were immediately following the flooding in Thailand, but you will spend more to buy one today than you would have a year or so ago.  Still, you'll want one, even if you only need it to hold your documents and media files so that your SSD doesn't have to.  The factors you're looking at haven't changed much:

1.  Spindle Speed:  The RPM rating of a mechanical hard drive is the speed at which the spindle, and thus the platters (the magnetized disks holding data) inside the drive spin.  The higher the RPM, the faster the drive.  For a system drive you want at least a 7200 RPM drive, I'd probably also prefer 7200 RPM for the secondary drive to go with an SSD, just to ensure fairly quick response for documents and other data stored on the drive.  Storage drives (and drives for a NAS/Server) can be of the slower 5400 RPM "Green" variety. 

2.  Capacity:  500GB drives are, in $/GB terms, a worse value than 1 and 2 TB drives.  If you can find a good deal on a 1TB drive, that's probably the best drive deal available for a primary/secondary system disk.  Still, 7200 RPM 2TB drives are more common and affordable now, and depending on sales and pricing can be better $/GB deals than 1TB drives.  You shouldn't bother buying a storage disk in a capacity lower than 2TB.

3.  Cache:  I'd say that 16MB of cache is good for a 500GB drive, 32MB is good for 1TB, 64 is good for 2TB.

4.  SATA III:  Most newer drives indicate full SATA 6Gb/s compatibility, which is meaningless because they'll never manage to saturate 3Gb/s, much less 6, but it doesn't impact performance and there's virtually never a price premium associated with it.  Basically, just don't buy a Hard Drive that runs on IDE or SATA 1.5Gb/s.

I still like the Samsung Spinpoint F3 1TB for a great value primary/secondary system drive.  It's speedy, relatively inexpensive (and goes on sale frequently) and, in my experience, reliable.  The newer ones are built by Seagate, but the drives are apparently unchanged (I own a pair of the new ones in addition to my older ones, and the controller PCB appears identical), the main difference appears to be where the drive components are sourced from.  Per usual, Seagate's Barracuda drives and Western Digital's Black series of drives are both excellent options as well.

For storage drives you have a few options.  Samsung's Spinpoint 2TB Green drives have had some pretty serious firmware issues in the past, but these appear to have been solved.  Their performance isn't world-beating, by any means, but they are generally one of the cheaper available 2TB drives and they appear to go on sale frequently..  Western Digital's Green drives are solid enough, but they do lack TLER (for RAID usage) and the fairly frequent head parking can be an irritant.  If you can find Seagate's 2TB 5900 RPM drive or Hitachi's 2 TB 5400 RPM drive at a reasonable price, those are both good buys.  Western Digital has recently released a new Red series of drives, specifically tailored for use with NAS appliances.  The stats in general for these drives look very good, so they'll probably be good storage options regardless of whether or not you use them "as intended."

Solid State Drives - Everyone Should Have an SSD.  Seriously.

You can buy a quality 128GB drive for like $90.00.  Yeah, let that wash over you.  Less than a year ago I paid almost $300.00 for a 120GB SATA 3Gb/s SSD, and now I can kick that drive's ass for less than a third of that price.  Admittedly, it's still not the best $/GB ratio around, but for the sheer performance of these drives, it's easily worth it.  Larger capacities can be even better deals, 256GB drives have been known to go on sale for as little as $150.00!  At those prices, you can't afford not to buy one, especially given the big performance jump over mechanical drives, lower power usage, smaller form-factor, and lack of any appreciable heat, noise, and vibration.

When choosing an SSD, buyers will want to look at price, along with 3 main factors that do the most to determine performance:  NAND type, controller, and firmware.  Generally speaking, there are 3 main types of NAND flash in use these days, Sychronous, Asynchronous, and Toggle.  Each has some different performance characteristics, with Synchronous and Toggle NAND generally considered the highest performing overall, though Asynchronous NAND based SSDs can be significantly cheaper.  I've noted the major current controllers (and firmware, where appropriate) below:

Sandforce - Ah, Sandforce.  Performance, low prices, what more could you ask for?  Frankly, stability.  Sandforce became fairly notorious early in this SSD generation for the frequent, seemingly inexplicable BSODs that occured on drives using their SF-2281 controller.  It took weeks for them to discover the cause of the error, and even longer for the firmware fix to make the rounds, and even now Sandforce drives are, relatively speaking, probably the least stable drives available.  Intel's 330 and 520 series SSDs have custom-made firmware that makes them the most reliable of this generation of Sandforce drives.  OCZ and Kingston have both developed more aggressively performance oriented Sandforce drives, with firmware to match.  Generally speaking, the most recent firmware packages for these drives make them solid enough for "home" use (I own two Corsair-built Sandforce drives and virtually never have any issues when using the newest firmware) and they are often excellent values from a price/performance perspective.  Whether or not you pick one of these drives over one based on another controller depends largely on your planned usage of the drive and whether or not the performance of the drive is worth the loss in stability.

Marvell - This generation of Marvell-based drives are considered very reliable, with competitive but not top-of-the-heap performance and excellent value.  Many companies make Marvell-based drives, including Crucial's nearly ubiquitous M4, which is an excellent confluence of price, performance and stability (also available in a 7mm version).  In addition to Crucial, Plextor has an excellent warranty policy and makes multiple excellent, performance focused Marvell-based SSDs and Corsair makes the Performance Pro, another performance oriented drive based on the Marvell controller.  A new, higher performance generation of Marvell controller is about to be released into the wild, starting with the Plextor M5 Pro.

Samsung - Samsung has their own controller for their own SSD, the Samsung 830.  Performance is excellent, and the drive is rock solid, just like its SATA 3Gb/s predecessor.  The drives are also 7mm tall, perfect for those who have "picky" laptops that only support that form factor.  In my experience, these drives are generally more expensive than comparable Sandforce and Marvel SSDs, but not excessively so, and I have seen them on sale.

OCZ/Indilinx Everest - The Everest controller is OCZ's first entry into using their own controllers (previously they had an agreement with Sandforce) and it's a pretty impressive "rookie" effort.  Technically speaking the actual silicon is made by Marvell (possibly derived from the next-gen controller in the Plextor M5 Pro) along with custom firmware from OCZ.  By some measures, these Everest based drives (right now just the OCZ Vertex 4) are the fastest around, and firmware revisions have kept them quick and reliable.  They aren't generally cheap, though.

If I had a gun to my head and had to pick just one product line to recommend, I'd say you're always safe with a Crucial M4.  As I mentioned above, they're some of the least expensive drives around, they frequently go on sale, they're available in multiple form factors, they perform well, and they're stable.  Not to sound too hyperbolic, but there's definitely a part of me that believes the 128GB and 256GB M4 SSDs are the best buys in storage today.

CPUs and Motherboards: Monopolies Make for Easy Buying Decisions

Processors:

So, the last time I wrote a big Motherboard/CPU post, Bulldozer was in the offing and even those of us on Intel platforms were probably cherishing hopes that AMD would start competing in the enthusiast CPU space again.  As is so often the case, hope was simply the first step on the road to disappointment.  Bulldozer was disingenuously marketed (really AMD, 8 cores?) and hopelessly outclassed by an architecture that released months before it did.  Since then, AMD has abandoned the enthusiast market to focus on APU and (presumably) mobile development in order to cling to relevancy.

The silver lining here is that AMD's incompetence has made building a PC easier for everyone: just buy an Intel proc.  "But it's not that simple!" you cry.  Admittedly, AMD's APUs are a nice product for the niche they occupy, but most people building a PC want discrete graphics, or aren't doing anything beyond the capabilities of an Intel integrated GPU.  Intel CPUs are the right call in almost all cases. 

Anyway, after making AMD look bad without even really trying, Intel released Ivy Bridge, a Sandy Bridge die shrink that includes Tri-Gate transistors as well as support for PCI-E 3.0 and a few other new gizmos.  In terms of processor performance, Ivy Bridge isn't a big improvement over Sandy Bridge, so the recommendations haven't changed much:

Intel Pentium G620/Celeron G550 - ~$60.00:  For the builder on a budget, the Pentium/Celeron is a perfect compromise.  It isn't clocked as high as an i3 and lacks some features from the higher end Core line (any kind of overclockability, Turbo Boost, Hyper Threading, Quick Sync, etc.) but that doesn't mean it isn't still great value.  Don't let the price fool you, it'll keep up with most workloads, and won't hold your video card back when you start up Pong or whatever other newfangled nonsense you rapscallions are playing these days.

Intel Core i3-2100 (Sandy Bridge), Intel Core i3-3220 (Ivy Bridge) - ~$120.00:  Ivy Bridge Core i3s don't come in quite the same number of "flavors" as the Sandy Bridge versions (at least not yet) but there's something out there for basically everyone.  For basic usage in a run-of the mill gaming PC, the i3-2100 (or i3-2120, depending on pricing) or the i3-3220 are your go-to chips.

Intel Core i5-2310 (Sandy Bridge), Intel Core i5-3350P/i5-3330 (Ivy Bridge):  Not everyone needs an overclockable proc, but many people are still interested in quad-core CPUs.  More games and applications are starting to take advantage of higher core counts, so those desiring four cores at a more affordable (read, sub 200 dollar) price are advised to look at these procs.  The "P" designation indicates that a lack of onboard video, so keep that in mind.

Intel Core i5-2500K (Sandy Bridge), Intel Core i5-3570K (Ivy Bridge) - ~$220.00:  The 2500K is still fantastic and is usually priced around $220.00, but seems to go on sale fairly often and can drop to $200.00.  The i5-3570K is often slightly more expensive, but is almost indistinguishable from its predecessor, performance-wise.  As mentioned above, Ivy Bridge does enable PCI-E 3.0 and some other benefits, but depending on your usage and equipment, either proc can be the right choice.  The 2500K generally OCs a bit better, particularly on air.

There's really no reason for the vast majority of buyers to look at more than the 2500K/3570K can offer.  Hyper Threading is not a particularly significant addition given the workloads of most home users, and that's really all the extra Benjamin buys you.  Those of you with niche cases that aren't covered by the above recommendations are welcome to ask in the thread or PM me regarding what you might need.

Motherboards:

All the processors I'm willing to recommend are on LGA 1155, but there are multiple motherboard chipsets available for these CPUs, split between Cougar Point chipsets (introduced with Sandy Bridge) and Panther Point chipsets (introduced with Ivy Bridge).  H61 is the most budget-oriented of the Cougar Point chipsets, and would be most appropriate for a very low cost build utilizing a Celeron or Pentium CPU.  H67 is the next step up, and generally these boards have more complete feature-sets, but are not SLI/CFX capable and do not allow for overclocking.  P67 allows for overclocking and multiple video cards, but does not provide the ability to utilize the integrated GPU as well.  Z68 followed after and enabled use of the integrated GPU, along with some other processor features, and some boards on this chipset include PCI-E 3.0 compatibility when used with Ivy Bridge procs.  The most relevant new chipsets are Z77 and H77, which released with Ivy Bridge.  They are backwards compatible, though PCI-E 3.0 will not work with Sandy Bridge procs.  For full enthusiast-class systems, there's no good reason not to just go with a Z77 board, it does everything a P67 or Z68 board could do and more.  H77 is an excellent chipset for lower-end systems that don't need overclocking capability, but H67 and H61 are not necessarily significantly less capable, and may be better values depending on your processor choice and desired feature-set.

There are a few manufacturers I would consider to be most worth considering for your purchasing dollars:

ASUS – ASUS is probably my favorite motherboard manufacturer.  I'd go with ASUS if you’re looking for a board with fairly cutting edge tech, and useful extras like built-in Wi-Fi and/or Bluetooth.  They have a number of different product lines, including the Republic of Gamers motherboard line for really high-end builds.

Gigabyte – Gigabyte has a reputation for rock solid reliability, which anecdotally I can verify, as I own a few of their boards myself.  VRM quantity and quality over their range of boards is very much in line with ASUS offerings (if not better).  Gigabyte has generally solid layouts (with some odd choices at times) though their board lineup can be tough to navigate due to similar model numbers (like UD3 vs. UD3R vs. UD3H).  Gigabyte generally stays a bit more conservative than ASUS with fancy tech and gadgetry, though they have gone whole hog on including mSATA slots on their boards for cache drives.  Instead of stuff like onboard Wi-Fi, you generally get a larger and more comprehensive set of ports.

MSI – MSI is my least favorite of the “Big 3” motherboard manufacturers.  Much of this opinion is probably lingering prejudice related to their AM3 boards and some questionable decisions in some of their P67-based boards.  MSI has recently been pushing Thunderbolt onto some of their higher-end offerings.  Their current offerings are very competitive, and while I might prefer ASUS or Gigabyte myself, there’s really no good reason not to consider MSI at the moment.

ASRock – ASRock sprang out of ASUS spinning off a company specifically to make budget motherboards.  They’re generally considered a “budget” manufacturer, but their Sandy Bridge offerings were very strong, with good VRMs in their enthusiast level boards, and solid layouts.  Those same enthusiast offerings also set themselves apart with very aggressive pricing and solid accessory sets.  Their Ivy Bridge offerings have continued that trend.  The documentation and BIOS/UEFI interfaces aren’t as polished as their higher-end competitors, but if you can deal with that, you can often get a really nice deal.

Beyond manufacturer, you should take into account the following criteria (along with price, naturally) when choosing a board:

Form Factor:  Be aware of the motherboard form factor, it’s crucial in ensuring compatibility with your case.

SLI/Crossfire capability:  This generally comes at a price premium, but if you’re genuinely going to take advantage of the capability, it’s worth the money.  If you are certain that you want a single card system, and have no plans to either add a second card in the future, or have 2 cards to start with, do not pay the premium.  And be realistic with yourself about the possibility of upgrading with a second card as well.  However, if you have the budget, and do think it’s a possibility, spend the money, you won’t regret it.

The basic requirement for SLI is 2 physical PCI-E x16 slots, which run at least at x8/x8 when both are populated.  Crossfire can run on 2 physical x16 slots that run at x16 and x4, but performance is compromised and I wouldn’t recommend it, at least x8/x8 is your best bet.  Higher end motherboards (or motherboards on higher-end sockets) may support multiple x16 slots running at a full x16.  For 2-way SLI/Crossfire, x8/x8 on PCI-E 2.0 is enough bandwidth to avoid throttling all but the highest-end of last-gen cards (and even then the performance loss is minimal).  I'd recommend a board and processor that are fully compatible with PCI-E 3.0 if you want to run multiple high-end cards from the current generation of GPUs.

VRMs:  The VRM system in your motherboard is the system that takes power from the PSU and converts it to the correct voltage to be utilized by the CPU and GPU.  If you see stuff like “12+2 power phases” being tossed about, that’s referring to the VRM system of your motherboard.  Basically the VRMs are small transformers that convert the +12V from your PSU into the correct voltages to run your stuff.  Phases refer to the number of transformers, the more you have, the lower the individual load on each transformer, which means a more stable, long-lasting board, especially when overclocking.  If you’re pushing things, poor quality/too few VRMs can mean catastrophic damage to the motherboard, and perhaps other parts as well.  For Sandy Bridge/Ivy Bridge, I would consider 6+2 to be adequate for reasonable overclocking, with 8+2 desired and anything above that being gravy.

Physical layout:  This is pretty important, especially in this age of double-wide GPUs and SLI/Crossfire setups.  For SLI/Crossfire motherboards, you want at least an additional expansion slot’s worth of space between PCI-E x16 slots in order to accommodate 2-slot GPU coolers.  For motherboards supporting only 2 GPUs, I’d recommend looking for 2 slots worth of space between, to give the top card some breathing room.  SATA ports should be either of the 90 degree variety, or placed to ensure they won’t be covered by longer graphics cards.  Front panel, audio and USB headers should be located along the edge of the board, easily accessible and away from any potential conflict with expansion cards.  Keep an eye on stuff like CPU socket positioning relative to DIMM slots, and the size and positioning of heatsinks on the motherboard.  Manufacturers are generally very good about avoiding those conflicts, but depending on heatsink size and layout you can sometimes have trouble mounting aftermarket CPU cooling.

BIOS/UEFI:  If you're looking at an overclocked system, you'll want a nice, full-featured BIOS/UEFI.  Some budget boards (even from otherwise high-end manufacturers) have taken to removing deeper, more complex customization options, and some manufacturers have very poorly put together interfaces, with nonsensical descriptions and confusing layouts.  Obviously, you'd like to avoid those if possible, so make sure to take a look at some reviews to see if you can't get an idea of what you'll be looking at.

Features and Documentation:  This is more nebulous, as it’s entirely up to your own discretion.  Each builder has different needs in terms of feature-set (quantity/type of ports, additional bells and whistles like Bluetooth, etc.).  Certain boards will come with automatic or software assisted overclocking options that other boards lack.  Do your research here, and choose the board that includes everything you need/want.  Similarly, some builders will need and/or want clear, comprehensive documentation of board features and installation, while others may be comfortable without it.

As for individual recommendations, I'll keep it fairly simple.  For basic builds (using Pentium/Celeron chips) go with the ASRock H77M.  For mid-range builds (using a Core i3 or non-K Core i5) go with the Intel DH77EB.  For high end builds (using Core i5 2500K or 3570K) go with the Gigabyte Z77X-UD3H.  If you need something fancier, or more esoteric, feel free to PM me or ask in the thread.

Video Cards: Yes, they can run Crysis

12-25-2012: Some of this information is still useful in a general capacity, but much of it is somewhat outdated.  You can find a more recent version of the post here.

Ah, Graphics.  The vast majority of you will spend as as much (or more) money here as you will on any other single part of your build.  That's a good thing, most games these days demand more from your graphics hardware than they do from anything else in your system.  If you want to encode/transcode video, or edit photos, or render 3D graphics, you need CPU horsepower.  If you want to game, you need just enough CPU not to hold your GPU back.

When recommending a gaming PC build, I generally advise a CPU/GPU combination with at least a 1:1 ratio in terms of expense.  For example, if you're going to run an i3-2100, I'd recommend at least a Radeon 5770/6770.  If you're going to run an i5-2400, I'd recommend at least a Radeon 6850/nVidia GTX 460 1GB.  If you're going to break with that ratio, do so in favor of the GPU. That is, go with an i3-2100 and a 6850, not an i5-2400 with a 5770.  Don't worry about your CPU bottlenecking your GPU, even a relatively lowly Core2Duo can still crunch enough numbers to avoid restricting most modern GPUs.  More recent budget processors are significantly more powerful, and even less likely to restrict your graphics hardware.

With all that said, it wouldn't be a GPU discussion if we didn't cover what I'm going to refer to as "The Ever-War".  Since what seems like the dawn of time, ATi (eventually bought and then absorbed by AMD), nVidia have been battling it out over the graphics card market.  The conflict has caused some collateral damage to less worthy combatants (3dfx, Matrox, S3...) but serious competition has bred serious horsepower.  The current generations of AMD and nVidia cards are well matched, relatively efficient, and impressively powerful even at lower price points.  I would advise prospective buyers to leave their biases at the door when choosing hardware here.  I've heard complaints about nVidia hardware, ATi/AMD drivers, and on and on.  What it boils down to is performance, choose the best performing hardware you can afford.  If you're looking at comparable AMD and nVidia cards, find out which one does a better job running the games you want to play.

In my recommendations below, I've highlighted what I think are some of the best options at various price points.  Where possible I've included both AMD and nVidia options. At times, there is simply no comparison, and you'll only see cards from a single manufacturer.  Prices are mentioned only in general, as video cards come from various manufacturers in many different models, and go on sale frequently.  I've noted some cards that seem to frequently price drop into a different range where necessary to make sure people are on the lookout for good deals.

~$125 - AMD Radeon 5770/6770: This is really the only option at this price range.  Nvidia's competition, the GTS 450, simply isn't as good as the 5770.  The 6770 is a cynical OEM rebadge of the classic 5770.  If you can find it for a comparable price to the 5770, go for it, but there's really no difference between the cards.

~$150 - AMD Radeon 6790 / nVidia GTX 460 768MB: These two cards run neck and neck, generally, and which you choose comes down to specific game performance and price.  Keep in mind that, depending on sales/combos you might be able to find either the 6850 or 460 GTX 1GB for around $150.

~$175 - AMD Radeon 6850 / nVidia GTX 460 1MB: Much like the $150 category, both of these cards have very similar performance levels, and the differences are largely in whether a particular game was designed in such a way as to favor one manufacturer over another.  One significant difference is that most 6850 models require only a single 6-pin PCI-E connector, whereas the 460 1GB requires 2 and is more power-hungry in general.  Keep that in mind when purchasing.  Also, do not buy a 460 GTX SE, it's a lobotomized budget model of the card and isn't worth your money.

~$200 - AMD Radeon 6870 / nVidia GTX 560: The GTX 560 is generally the better performer over the 6870.  Not by an excessive amount, necessarily, but it's a more clear definition than at the $150 or $175 price levels.  Fortunately, the 6870 generally goes for less than the GTX 560, which makes the value comparable.

~$250 - AMD Radeon 6950 1GB / nVidia GTX 560 Ti: Here the 6950 1GB is the superior performer.  The 560 Ti is a good card, and can often be found slightly cheaper than the 1GB version of the 6950.  Either card is a good value, and both have similar power requirements.

~$350 - 2x AMD Radeon 6850 / 2x nVidia 460 GTX 1GB: Sometimes the best graphics card for the money is 2 of them.  Crossfire and SLI are no longer immature technologies with limited support and poor scaling, these days any game worth its salt supports both of these multi-GPU solutions, and scaling is very impressive.  These setups offer GTX 580 levels of performance for a significant discount, even when you consider the expense of an SLI/Crossfire capable motherboard.  If both the 6850 and the 460 GTX 1GB are selling for roughly the same price, the 6850 CFX is the cheaper option, due to its lower power requirements.  If you prefer a single card option, then look at the GTX 570, the GTX 560 Ti w/ 448 Cores, or the Radeon 6970.

Options on the low and high end: Lower end GPUs are numerous. Let us know your intended resolution in order for us to offer the best price/performance option. Higher end GPU setups are largely a matter of deciding how much you're budgeting on the GPU(s) and then purchasing the appropriate multi-GPU setup (~$400, 2x 560 GTX / Radeon 6870, for example). It's generally not worth it performance-wise to go with a single card vs. a similarly priced SLI/Crossfire option, unless you have some kind of space/PCI-E slot restriction that demands it, or you intend to upgrade down the line to a SLI/Crossfire setup. Be realistic about the latter option, many times that impulse goes by the wayside, or you wait too long to drop in the 2nd GPU and suddenly you're better off just upgrading wholesale.

Recently, we've seen the release of AMD's Radeon 7970 card, and some of the lower-end derivations of their new platform. The 7970 is a fantastic card, the best single-GPU card out there, so if you're in the market for speed, and price is no object, there's no better option. The rest of the lower-end cards have begun trickling out, starting with the 7950 (another great card) and the 7770. Pricing is a bit off at the moment for the latter, as it's a bit more expensive than the 6850, but a bit less impressive. Once prices stabilize and the range of cards is closer to completion, you should expect to see the above recommendations change, at least on the AMD side. Kepler (NVIDIA's next big thing) is likely a month or more away.

Cases and PSUs: Basics and Recommendations

Choosing a case and PSU for your new PC build is often something of an afterthought. It's easy to make the mistake of focusing in hard on your sweet, sweet CPU and GPU purchases, buying the best performing components you can afford, then sticking them in whatever case you can buy with what's left of your budget, along with the cheapest PSU you could find that would (supposedly) power your build.

The reality is that Cases and PSUs are, in a way, the most important part of any PC build. A case with poor cooling performance might result in long term (or, in extreme cases, even short-term) damage to your components. The harder it is to build in your case, the more likely you are to accidentally damage the case, your components, or yourself (the cheaper the case, the sharper the edges) trying to force things. And if the case was hard to build in, it won't be easy to upgrade components in, or clean. Keep in mind that a great case is an investment. Unlike a processor or graphics card, which can go from cream of the crop to just 2nd (or 3rd) best in the time it takes to get it shipped to your door, your case can be around for a long time, and be home to many upgrades and new builds, as long as you buy a solid model that gives you room to grow. It's worth the extra expense. A PSU is even more significant. A quality, enthusiast grade PSU is a solid, efficient, purpose built piece of electronics, and if you keep things reasonable, it will serve you well through upgrades, and even new builds. A quality PSU can do all you ask of it and more, and while you shouldn't go crazy, you'd be surprised by what a nice Seasonic or Corsair or Antec (etc.) can do for you. Of course, if you choose poorly, you could turn your multi-hundred dollar PC build into a paperweight fashioned of smoldering silicon trapped within sheet metal.

Below you'll find information and guidelines on Case and PSU choice, as well as some recommendations (prices current as of February 20, 2012) on what might be a good buy for your budget.

Cases

When looking at cases, I recommend looking for the following features as a baseline:

1. Cable Management - At this point, reasonable cable management features are so common in cases at all budget levels that there really isn't any reason to buy a case without them. Sometimes the case will have a large void on the right side of the motherboard tray (many older Cooler Master cases like the CM Storm Sniper use this method), others will have cutouts (sometimes with rubber grommets) to bring cables back through. Ideally the case will feature a cutout for your 8 pin CPU power cable as well, but some cheaper cases with cable management don't have them. If you're lucky and careful, you might be able to thread your 8 pin under your motherboard and through the CPU backplate cutout to mimic the effect. Regardless of the style or number/location of cutouts offered, the basic idea is always the same, moving cables behind the motherboard tray as much as possible and bringing them out right where they need to be. Cable management doesn't just make your case innards look pretty, it helps your case stay cool.

2. Bottom-mounted PSU w/ Vent - Once again, this feature is very common on quality cases of all budget levels, so you shouldn't have any trouble finding something you like. Basically this feature improves case layout by placing your PSU at the bottom of the case, where it can intake cool air from under the case and exhaust it. It largely removes your PSU from the thermal equation. It's nice if the vent is filtered.

3. Good Thermal Options - At the very least your case should have mounts for a front intake fan, and a rear exhaust fan. These should be at least 120mm fan mounts. Ideally you'll have options side intake and top exhaust fans as well (2 fan mounts for each location is fairly standard in a good enthusiast level case). If you have multiple front intake fans (or a single larger, say, 200mm fan) the side intake is less important. Filtered intakes are a plus.

4. General Good Design - I always look for a few additional good design decisions in a case. A good case should feature at least some tool-less/screwless options for hardware mounting. Understandably, tool-less mechanisms are less numerous the lower the price of the case, but the best budget options still often feature thumbscrews, and/or a single tool-less mount on the 5.25 bays. The HDD cages should be oriented to place the "back" of the drive, where your SATA and Power connectors are, toward the side of the case with the motherboard tray, to facilitate cable routing. Keep an eye out for a nice sized CPU backplate cutout, it'll make attaching an aftermarket cooler immeasurably easier. Finally, most cases worth your time will have at least 2 front panel USB 2.0 ports to go with the HD audio hookups.

Naturally, these baselines can't cover everything, depending on your budget or intended usage (HTPC cases are usually pretty short on cable routing possibilities, for example) you might find that some of those features aren't necessary to you. But, for a standard tower for the computer enthusiast and/or gamer, that's the stuff you want.

After you've taken a look at what's available and eliminated those cases that just don't make the cut, buy within your budget, and keep aesthetics under consideration. You'll be less inclined to take care of something you can barely stand to look at. There are a number of unique touches and additions that can increase the value of the case for your particular build, so be thorough and make sure you've found something you can live with. If you're having trouble figuring out where to start, check the list below for some good starting points at various budget levels. PM me if you think your case is rad and I don't have it on the list!


NOTE: This list ignores shipping costs.

• $40: NZXT Source 210
• $60: CM HAF 912
• $80: CM 690 II Advanced (Owned by: Alecthar)
• $100: Corsair 400R
• $100: Fractal Design Arc Midi
• $130: NZXT Phantom
• $140: Corsair 500R
• $160: CM HAF 932 Advanced (Full Tower)
• $160/$170: Corsair 600T/Corsair 600T SE (Owned by: Alecthar, Hardtarget, Squall, MagicPrime, finalflight89 and many others...)
• $180: CM HAF X (Full Tower)
• More money: Generally speaking, for an air-cooled build you won't need to spend more than $200 to get a top of the line case with way more than enough room and features for what you want to do. Some more esoteric cases (like the Silverstone inverted motherboard mount cases) or virtually anything of full-tower size from Lian Li might run you more, but that's up to you. Cases suitable for hardcore water cooling are often an exception and some of the older ones that are still beloved are difficult to find, so you can definitely end up spending more there. That's a class in itself though, one that I'm not as comfortable addressing.

Power Supplies

Buying a power supply is a crucial decision, and it doesn't respond well to the kind of "pop it in our test rig and benchmark it" style of reviewing that most PC component review sites tend to favor. In many cases, a power supply that runs a test rig just fine can be less efficient than advertised, unable to pull its rated peak wattage, and have out of specification electrical ripple and noise that can damage your components. Fewer sites than you'd think actually test power supplies correctly, below are 3 of my favorites:

johnnyGuru
[H]ardOCP
Hardware Secrets

All of these sites are very transparent about their methodology, which is good because I've found that legitimate power supply reviews are very important in determing the correct supply to buy. For example, reviews might help you find out that while some Antec PSU lines are very solid (True Power New, original Earthwatts below 650W), others are mediocre to terrible (new Earthwatts, original Earthwatts from 650W and up, Basiq). This hodgepodge of awesome, acceptable, and awful product lines occurs largely because most major PSU vendors sell PSU lines that are rebadged (and sometimes modified) power supplies from other companies (Seasonic, CWT, and many others). So, while one line might benefit by being based on a solid Seasonic platform, another might be crippled by being based on a (literally) explosive Huntkey PSU. Because you don't have time to deconstruct a boatload of power supplies, your best option is to let good, reputable reviewers do the legwork for you.

So, you have some good resources that will let you know what to look for, but when you find it, you find that it has 2 12V rails, and your good buddy told you that quality PSUs should only have a single 12V rail. Or, it's modular, and that same buddy told you all about how that's bad and not as good as hardwired cables.

Your buddy is an idiot.

Apologies for my bluntness, but there are numerous myths/semi-myths that you hear all the time about PSUs that can really interfere with the buying process. Let's take a look at some “conventional wisdom” that is simply incorrect:

• Modular cabling increases resistance/is another point of failure/is at increased risk for corrosion: The first and second points are technically true, but in the first case, the added resistance is entirely negligible, it's roughly equivalent to a few additional inches of cabling. Modular cables are, in theory, at slightly increased risk for failure, but the risk is very slim in a quality supply, and if you use PSU cable extensions (for example) you're essentially assuming the same risk, just slightly further down the cable. The third claim is just untrue. Modular cabling, either in fully or partially modular supplies, is really helpful in maintaining a clean build. It's a nice feature to have that usually comes at a price premium. Don't spend loads of additional money on it, but it is worth a reasonable amount of cash to have on a quality supply.

• Single Rail/Multi Rail designs are superior to Multi Rail/Single Rail designs: The objections here are slightly different. Single rail designs get boosted by many because of issues multi-rail supplies had 4-5 years ago with load balancing. Since then, design has improved and those problems are a thing of the past (at least in quality supplies). Multi-rail supplies are “superior” because Single-Rail supplies above a certain wattage (around 600W) have OCP (over current protection) that is set so high out of necessity (because all of the current on the 12V rail is on a single rail) that it's likely that, in the event of a short circuit that the SCP (Short Circuit Protection) doesn't catch, you'll sustain serious to catastrophic component damage before the OCP kicks in. Now, it's really unlikely that such a short circuit would occur, so really Multi-Rail vs. Single-Rail is a non-issue, but if you really want the absolute safest supply and you need more than 600ish Watts, go with a quality Multi-Rail unit.

• Headroom! More Headroom!: Okay, so often I'm the first person to buy more than I need, but a quality PSU is a well-designed, precision engineered, ass-kicking beast with as many safety precautions built in as the manufacturer can fit onto a PCB.  Buy enough PSU to run your PC at full bore and no more.  You'll hardly ever use that much PSU, and you'll be burning money in electricity bills if you buy a PSU where your normal usage doesn't fall roughly in the area where the PSU is most efficient.

So with all that said, here's a few manufacturer recommendations/warnings to keep in mind as you buy your PSU:

The Good

Corsair – Corsair has made something of a name for itself in the PSU sector, and they do make some of the better PSUs available today (their AX series, mostly). Many of their older lines are still favorites among enthusiasts, though other companies have come out with competing/superior lines. Still, those are completely solid supplies, even if they aren't the best performers anymore. With the exception of the current “Builder Series” (PSUs labeled CX430, CX500, CX600, which are labeled at higher wattages than they probably should be), and the new Gamer Series (which are solid, but probably overpriced, and mostly exist to be sold at brick and mortar outlets like Best Buy) I would recommend a Corsair supply without hesitation.

Seasonic – Seasonic makes some of the best PSUs in the world, including most of the best PSUs in the world from vendors like Corsair and Antec. You see, Seasonic is both an OEM vendor, and a Retail vendor. Most of their retail supplies are clustered around lower wattages, usually under 650W, but they make high quality, efficient supplies.

NZXT - These guys have recently stepped up to the plate with some seriously nice supplies. They have some more "budget-friendly" PSUs OEM'd by Seasonic, and their Hale90 series of PSUs is OEM'd by Superflower, and is a great platform.

Antec – Despite my continued dislike of Antec's Basiq series of PSUs, I've come to the conclusion that Antec is doing much more right than wrong in the PSU market these days. The True Power New line (which appears to be EOLed) is great, as are the True Power Quattro units. The Antec Neo Eco units are really solid Seasonic-based units that are absolutely perfect for budget-conscious builders. The Antec High Current Gamer supplies are, at least at most wattages, built on the Seasonic S12II Bronze platform, so they're also a great budget-friendly choice. Antec also makes one of the best 1200W supplies available, the 1200W High Current Pro. The Earthwatts line is an adequate budget-friendly line of PSUs. I wouldn't use their higher wattage units in a higher-end build, but their low-wattage units are reliable, even if their performance won't wow you.

The Mediocre

Thermaltake – Thermaltake pretty much averages out to mediocre. Their Toughpower and Toughpower XT lines are both solid, if generally overpriced. Their other lines, though, like their TR2 supplies, are generally terrible, with a few thoroughly mediocre units in the mix.

Rosewill - Rosewill has some truly horrid crud, but also has some solid units, and some great units. In particular, their Gold-certified Lightning units are OEM'd by Superflower using their fantastic "Golden Green" platform, and are really solid values with some high voltage options for those who need them.

The Bad

Cooler Master – It's surprising, in a way, that a company that makes some really great cases also makes some exceptionally terrible PSUs. Out of all the power supplies that Cooler Master has in their lineup, only the Silent Pro M is really worth your time, and even those supplies aren't particularly good values. Aside from the 4 supplies in that line, avoid like the plague.

Ultra Products – Ultra has had a fairly tarnished reputation for a while, and has made some steps toward redemption recently, but between their fairly frivolous lawsuit regarding modular PSUs, and some recent incidences of them falsely claiming SLI certification, it's really hard to label them as anything other than a cruddy company.

Generics – God help me, don't use the power supply that came with your case.

As for specific purchasing recommendations...well it's hard to say. PSU choice is heavily dependent on what particular wattage, feature set, and connector demands you have. Buy a good supply from a good company, and be prepared to spend at least 50 to 60 bucks, even if you're looking at something in the 500W range. It sucks to spend money, but this is one of those instances where you will pay significantly more later if you try to save 20 bucks now.

HDDs and SSDs: The Story of Storage

08-18-2012: A lot of this information is still useful in a general capacity, but much of it is somewhat outdated.  You can find a more recent version of the post here. 


Disclaimer: Flooding in Thailand has, until recently, been driving prices on mechanical Hard Drives stratospherically high. Recent price-checking seems to indicate a downward trajectory, which is nice, but it might still be advisable to postpone a purchase in this are until HDDs reach their pre-flood price levels.

Storage is (or at least was) profoundly un-sexy. For years, mechanical Hard Disk Drives (HDDs) had been the only reasonable consumer option for this kind of storage, and HDDs are old-school tech. That's not to say they haven't been improved over the many, many years they've been around, but at a certain point you just start taking them for granted. However, the relatively recent advent of Solid State Drives (SSDs) using NAND Flash has rather changed that dynamic. SSDs are faster, lighter, smaller, consume less power and are less fragile than mechanical HDDs. Apparently, the only thing they don't do is cook you breakfast, and that's because they already hired someone for that. You're welcome. Unfortunately for the average user, SSDs (and the technology they're based on) are still maturing, and prices are high. They just aren't feasible for many budgets at this point, especially with the current glut of fantastic 1TB HDDs. The following is intended to give you a rundown of some of the recent history of HDDs and SSDs, as well as some of the drives to look for.

Hard Disk Drives

Unless your PC building budget is roughly the same size as the GDP of Latvia, you're going to need at least 1 mechanical HDD, even if you're running an SSD alongside it. Solid State Drives simply haven't yet reached the capacity levels necessary for them to replace a good mechanical hard drive for mass storage. HDDs with eight times the storage capacity of a nice SSD can go for 1/4th the price. Hard drives are good for more than just mass storage, though. Admittedly, no HDD will beat an SSD in speed, but a solid HDD system drive will be more than fast enough for the vast majority of users.

So what should you be looking for in a system drive?

1. Spindle Speed: The RPM rating of a mechanical hard drive is the speed at which the spindle, and thus the platters (the magnetized disks holding data) inside the drive spin. The higher the RPM, the faster the drive. For a system drive you want at least a 7200 RPM drive.

2. Capacity: I'd say at least 500GB. 1TB is often the sweet spot, price-wise. Good 2TB 7200RPM drives do exist, but they're expensive.

3. Cache and Platter size: Most relatively recent 500GB and 1TB HDDs are single platter drives, which is good for performance. I'd say that 16MB of cache is good for a 500GB drive, 32MB is good for 1TB.

4. SATA II: I'm not sure HDDs using legacy interfaces like IDE and SATA I are still available, but if so avoid them. You also don't need SATA III compatibility, as no mechanical HDD can saturate the 3Gb/s link provided by SATA II, much less double that. You don't need to avoid SATA III HDDs, but often the SATA II models are less expensive and perform just as well.

My current favorite system drive HDD is the Samsung Spinpoint F3 1TB. Other good options include the Western Digital Black 1TB drives, the Seagate 7200.12 1TB drives, and the Hitachi 7200 RPM Desktar 1TB drives.

When looking for a storage drive, things are simpler. Spindle speed can be lower (5400-5900 RPM) and higher capacity drive sizes (2TB) are more affordable. I'd look at the Hitachi 5K3000 2TB and the Seagate Barracuda Green 2TB.

Solid State Drives

SSDs are a whole other world. Rather than spinning disks, SSDs utilize solid state memory (most commonly NAND Flash, like the stuff in a USB memory stick, though NOR Flash or DRAM SSDs also exist largely in enterprise environments). Most NAND Flash drives consume significantly less power than mechanical hard drives, and without the need to accommodate platters and head mechanisms, they can be produced in significantly smaller form factors. SSDs are significantly lighter than desktop hard drives, and are entirely silent. Solid State Drives have no moving parts, and are thus significantly less fragile than hard drives. They can sustain shocks and movement while in operation without damage, and (for obvious reasons) do not sustain mechanical wear and tear. Manufacturing defects and poor materials can still result in premature drive death, but a lack of moving parts essentially eliminates mechanical failure. Read/Write speeds are significantly faster than mechanical drives, and random access/seek times and latency are extremely low by comparison to mechanical drives.

There are definite downsides to SSDs as well, though. Unlike mechanical drives, there is often a significant delta between read and write speeds for solid state storage. NAND Flash is also rated for a limited number of write/erase cycles (3,000 for the 20nm NAND used in current-gen SSDs). The Flash may continue to function beyond its rating, but it's only guaranteed to function reliably up to that point. Failure, in whole or in part, could occur on the 3001st cycle, or the 8000th. Current NAND Flash SSDs also experience issues with degradation in write performance over time. TRIM or good garbage collection can do a lot to alleviate these issues, but all overwrites (for instance, saving a new version of a document under the same name as the original, thus overwriting the original) will occur at lower than the rated write speed. These problems result from a disparity in the way NAND Flash writes and erases data.

Perhaps the most persuasive argument against SSDs, though, is the sheer expense associated with owning one, and the exceedingly poor ratio between the cost and capacity. It's expensive to own even a relatively small SSD. One large enough to store your OS and a few critical programs will cost you over $100, and you'll likely need a good 7200 RPM HDD for the rest of your programs anyway. Larger capacities are significantly more expensive.

Nevertheless, if you can afford an SSD, I'd say it's worth it, especially with this new generation of SATA III capable SSDs. If you're looking for a new SSD, there are quite a few options. The price/performance champions are Sandforce (SF-2200) based drives from any number of manufacturers (Intel, OCZ, Corsair, Kingston, and more). These can come in asychronous NAND (OCZ Agility, for example) or synchronous NAND (OCZ Vertex 3, for example) flavors. Synchronous options have performance advantages.

Unfortunately, SF-2200 based drives have reliability issues. The most significant BSOD bug was recently addressed with a firmware fix, but most drives still have some stability issues. The exception to this are Intel's recent 520 series drives (codenamed "Cherryville") which are basically built from the ground up (from NAND selection and physical construction all the way through heavily tested custom firmware) to be eminently reliable as well as fast. From all appearances, Intel has succeeded.

Non-Sandforce options are numerous, and many are quite strong as well. Marvell controllers are used in many good drives, like Intel's 510 series and Crucial's M4. Samsung uses their own controller for the excellent Samsung 830. OCZ uses their own Everest controller in the solid Octane drives.

If I were to be forced to recommend one series of drives for a user who wanted the best compromise between price, reliability and speed, I would go with the Crucial M4. It has good firmware support from Crucial, has proven to be quite reliable, and is plenty zippy.

Memory: Simpler Than it Looks

Buying RAM these days is really about sticking to some rules and buying from a reputable manufacturer.

1. Buy DDR3: Only legacy sockets from AMD and Intel support DDR2. If you're building a new PC, you're going to be buying a motherboard that supports DDR3, and DDR4 support is likely a year or more away.

2. There are only 2 RAM speeds worth worrying about: Unless you're willing to spend lots of money for extremely overclockable RAM, there are only 2 DDR3 speeds you should be thinking about: 1333Mhz and 1600Mhz. In real-world situations, there isn't likely to be any significant difference between performance at those two speeds. More expensive, faster RAM may make your benchmarks look good, but in the real world it doesn't provide enough genuine performance benefit to be worth the price premium. Similarly, buying desktop memory at sub-1333Mhz speeds doesn't save you any significant amount in comparison to the performance detriment (if you can even find memory that slow).

3. Don't worry about timings: Tighter timings (lower timing numbers) mean that your RAM is faster, but generally speaking you won't see significant real-world benefits from tighter-than-standard timings. Standard 1600Mhz RAM usually runs at 9-9-9-24, which is just fine. Just like RAM speed, generally speaking tighter timings aren't worth the price premium associated with them.

4. Buy at least 4GB of RAM: Memory utilization for Windows 7 is actually pretty good, but memory usage for programs in general has scaled up over the past few years, and you're definitely going to want at least 4GB of RAM, 8GB if budget allows.

5. Buy matching DIMMs: Try to buy your RAM in kits (sets of matching DIMMs). If you can't (maybe you already have a single DIMM in the system), you should match model numbers (not just "2GB Corsair Vengeance" but the actual model number of the RAM, "CMZ8GX3M2A1600C9"). So if you're running a single 2GB DIMM and you want to add a second, make sure you purchase an identical 2GB DIMM from the same manufacturer. It's entirely possible that non-matching RAM will function, but you'll eliminate a lot of potential conflicts, issues, and headaches by ensuring that your sets match.

6. Buy the right kits for your multi-channel setup: So if you have a Triple Channel board (only boards using Intel's LGA1366 socket, like the X58 platform), buy in sets of 3 DIMMs. If you're running on a Dual Channel board (all current-gen AMD chipsets and all non-LGA1366 Intel chipsets), buy in sets of 2. If you don't fill the channel, you're sacrificing performance by not taking advantage of the multi-channel setup.

7. Follow guideline #6, but always buy the fewest DIMMs possible while doing so: So if you're on a dual channel board and want 8GB of RAM, don't buy 4x2GB sticks. Yes, you're buying in sets of 2, but you'll be filling all your DIMM slots and inhibiting future upgrades. Buy 2x4GB sticks instead.

8. Pay attention to clearance: Keep your CPU cooler and DIMM slot positioning in mind. Many of the large aftermarket tower style coolers overhang one or more DIMM slots (or have a fan that, when mounted, does so). Avoid contacting your RAM heatsinks with your CPU heatsink or fan, even if no pressure is applied (pressure can result in long-term damage to the DIMM and/or DIMM slot).

Some solid manufacturers:
G.SKILL
Corsair
Mushkin
Kingston
Crucial
Patriot

Motherboards & CPUs: The Electrified Heart of your PC

08-18-2012: A lot of this information is still useful in a general capacity, but much of it is somewhat outdated.  You can find a more recent version of the post here.

Motherboards and CPUs are system defining components, so be prepared to spend some time and effort on deciding the right combination for your purposes.  They dictate your upgrade paths, your overclocking possibilities, they contribute hugely to the performance of your system, and they're central to a number of other decisions you'll make as you build a PC.

Motherboards

Choosing the right motherboard can help you build a well-balanced, upgradeable system with features aplenty.  The wrong motherboard can lead to copious RMAs and wasted time and effort.  Below you'll find information and recommendations to take some of the guesswork out of choosing the right board for you.

So what stuff matters in a motherboard?

• Form Factor:  Be aware of the motherboard form factor, you don't want to end up with a motherboard that won't fit in your case.

• SLI/Crossfire Capability:  This generally comes at a price premium, but if multiple GPUs are in your future (or present) it's worth the money.  However, if you are definitely only going single card, and don't envision yourself ever using multiple GPUs, don't pay the premium.  The basic requirement for SLI is 2 physical PCI-E x16 slots, which run at least at x8/x8 when both are populated.  Crossfire can run with a card in a x4 lane, but performance is compromised and I wouldn't recommend that, x8/x8 as a minimum is your best bet.  Higher end motherboards (or motherboards on higher end sockets) might support multiple x16 slots running at the full x16.  Currently that's limited to higher end AM3/AM3+ boards, X58 boards, and P55/P67/Z68 boards with the NF200 chip.  For 2-way SLI/Crossfire, x8/x8 is enough bandwidth to avoid bottlenecking all but the highest of high-end cards, and even then performance loss is relatively miniscule.

• VRMs:  The VRM system in your motherboard is a series of small transistors that function as transformers, taking the +12V power from your PSU and sending it to the CPU, GPU and motherboard components in the correct voltages for those parts.  When you see things like "12+2 power phases" being tossed about, they're referring to the number of VRM transformers (in this case, 12 for CPU power and 2 for GPU power).  More power phases means lower individual loads on each transformer, which makes for a more stable experience, especially when overclocking.  Fewer VRMs, or VRMs of inferior quality, can mean catastrophic damage to the motherboard and potentially other components if you push things too far. 

• Physical Layout:  The advent of all double slot GPUs all the time has made the layout of the board, in particular the PCI-E slots, of even greater importance than before.  For SLI/Crossfire capable motherboards, you want at least 1 additional expansion slot's worth of space between PCI-E x16 slots to accommodate 2-slot coolers.  For motherboards supporting only 2 GPUs, I'd recommend looking for 2 slot's worth of space, to give the top card room to breath.  SATA ports should either be of the 90 degree variety (so parallel to the PCB) or placed to ensure they won't be covered by longer graphics cards.  Front panel, audio, and USB headers should located on the edge of the board, away from potential conflict with expansion cards.  Along the bottom edge is usually best.  Keep an eye on CPU socket positioning relative to DIMM slots and motherboard heatsinks.  It's tough to avoid DIMM slot conflicts, but most motherboard manufacturers are very good about making certain their motherboard heatsinks don't interfere with aftermarket CPU coolers.

• Features:  This is more nebulous, because what constitutes an acceptable set of features is entirely up to the builder's discretion.  Make sure you're buying a board that has all the ports and additional bells and whistles that you desire.  Some boards come with automatic hardware/software assisted overclocking options, for example.  Do your research here, and choose a board that gives you what you want.

What motherboard brands are worth checking out?

• ASUS - ASUS is currently my favorite motherboard manufacturer.  They usually have some of, if not the, best VRM setups around, and their boards are usually feature-packed with good layouts.  They tend to keep their board lineup relatively simple, which does help prevent confusion.

• Gigabyte - Gigabyte has a reputation for reliability, which I can anecdotally confirm based on my Gigabyte X58 board.  Their high end and mid-range boards usually come with solid VRMs, though their lower end offerings can be stingy in that area.  Gigabyte generally has solid layouts (with a few questionable calls, like on front panel audio header placement).  Their board lineup can be a maze of secondary designations and extremely similar model numbers (UD3 vs. UD3R for example), and they have not yet moved to UEFI based BIOS.  Many of their Z68 boards also don't support the GPU virtualization technology that makes the switchable graphics for that platform possible  (this shortcoming has been largely addressed by a new wave of Z68XP boards with the Virtu chip onboard).

• MSI - MSI is my least favorite of the "Big 3" motherboard makers.  Their AM3 lineup was notorious for poor VRMs, even the boards that had sufficient power phases endured engineering/manufacturing defects that could cause VRMs to die in a fire.  Literally.  MSI's layouts for Sandy Bridge have been the worst of the Big 3, with front panel headers and vertical SATA ports placed directly under areas where a second GPU would rest.  In general, their motherboards don't seem as well built or as well designed as competitor's boards in the same price range.  With the TDP and power reqs of Sandy Bridge being so low, and the quality of the VRMs being (hopefully) fairly high, most 115 MSI motherboards aren't likely to be genuine liabilities, but generally I think your money is better spent elsewhere.

• ASRock - ASRock sprang out of ASUS spinning off a company specifically to target budget-conscious consumers, and as such ASRock is often (though perhaps unfairly) lumped in with companies like Biostar.  Their 1155 offerings contradict that impression, though, with generous VRMs, good layouts and accessory bundles, not to mention their aggressive pricing.[/LIST]

As you'll find in the Processors section, my current opinion is that Intel's 1155 socket is the best option available for all but the most restricted of budgets. 1155 boards come in a few flavors, but the ones suitable for overclocking and SLI/Crossfire usage are either P67 based, or Z68 based. Z68 includes a few additional features on top of those included in P67 boards. Z68 allows for SSD caching, which is useful for those who have a small SSD (usually around 30ish GB) that they'd like to use as a cache. This will improve disk performance and general system responsiveness, though not as much as having an SSD as your boot drive will, so it's of utility only for those with an SSD that is too small to use as a boot drive. Z68 also includes support for using the built-in GPU of Sandy Bridge processors to accelerate video encoding/transcoding. Unfortunately, while there are significant speed gains available using this process, very few transcoding/encoding applications support this at the moment. Z68 boards with the Virtu chip also support using the integrated GPU during low load situations (at desktop, for basic video playback, etc.) in order to reduce power consumption. All in all, Z68 is of relatively little utility, especially if you don't have an SSD or don't need to use one for cache. P67 generally has a price advantage, and the feature sets are so similar that I don't see much reason to pay more. Just for the sake of completeness, though, Z68 boards are included with the P67 recommendations below.

P67:
$150 - ASRock P67 Extreme4 Gen3
$180 - ASUS P8P67 Pro
$190 - Gigabyte P67 UD4

Z68:
$175 - ASRock Z68 Extreme4
$190 - ASUS P8Z68-V Gen3
$180 - Gigabyte Z68XP-UD3P

Options on the low and high end:  For those building with non-K CPUs, fewer VRMs and/or less effective VRM cooling is less of an issue, as there is no overclocking to stress them beyond normal levels.  With that in mind, a solid H67/H61 board is a good bet.  For those looking for very high-end boards (perhaps with support for more than 2 GPUs, or multiple x16 lanes) please ask in the thread.  There are several different offerings, and your particular feature needs and case selection will be important in determining what board is best for you.

Processors

Compared to motherboards, where layout, build quality and feature-set are the primary concerns, CPUs are a numbers game.  Synthetic and real-world benchmarks will tell the story of a proc's prowess, so benchmarks and reviews are your independent research pals.  Right now the best processors at reasonable budget levels are Intel's Sandy Bridge processors.  They are faster, clock for clock, than previous Intel and current AMD offerings, and are relatively budget friendly.

The current recommendations:

Intel Core i3-2120 - $127.00: Suitable for budget levels ~$600.  This is a really solid dual core (with HT) that will hold up its end in all arenas.  It's not going to match a real quad-core in heavily threaded apps, but it's not going to be holding your GPU back.

Intel Core i5-2400 - $190.00: Suitable for budget levels ~$800.  The 2400 isn't vastly cheaper than the 2500K, but you can run a cheaper H67 board with it and not lament the loss of overclocking potential, so that helps keep costs down.  Despite its overclocking limitations, it's a great quad-core.

Intel Core i5-2500K - $230.00: Suitable for budget levels ~$1000 and up.  The 2500K doesn't give you Hyper Threading or do your homework, but that's just about the only stuff it won't do.  It's hugely powerful, hugely overclockable, and at $220.00, remarkably affordable.

Options on the low and high end: For really low budget options, I recommend asking in the thread. On the high end, there are the i7-2600/2600K, or the i7-2700/2700K (essentially a 2600/2600K with slightly higher stock clocks). The basic differences between the 2500K and the 2600K are a marginal stock clockspeed and cache advantage on the 2600K's part, and the 2600K has Hyper-Threading. If you do a lot of heavily threaded workloads, like high-end photo/movie editing or graphic design, the 2600K might justify it's $100 price premium over the 2500K. But if you're just an amateur Photoshop enthusiast while you aren't gaming, stick with the 2500K, it's more than enough CPU to handle the vast majority of tasks.

The other option on the high end is to switch Intel's ridiculously overpowered and overpriced LGA2011 platform and use a Sandy Bridge E processor. As I said in this blog post, I don't see any compelling reason for the majority of users to want the kind of horsepower (and expense) that goes along with Sandy Bridge E, but if you're a nutjob for whom price is no object, or a professional who could genuinely use that much horsepower, it is an option.